Iraq has been a Propaganda Disaster for al Qaeda
Did you know that the Pew Research Center just released a new poll of how Muslims feel about Osama bin Laden and his penchant for intentionally slaughtering innocent civilians using suicide bombers? The results are worth noting because it is often said that Bush's invasion of Iraq has been a propaganda boon to al Qaeda. For example, in an article in May/June 2007 issue of Foreign Affairs, Bruce Reidel said:
The U.S invasion of Iraq and the chaos that followed were a boon to al Qaeda's propaganda efforts, as they offered tangible evidence, al Qaeda's leaders could argue, both that Washington had imperialist plans and that the jihad against U.S. forces was working.
In an article in the New Republic, Bradford Plumer said:
There's a broad consensus among terrorism experts that the GOP's signature policy issue--the Iraq war--has been a boon to Al Qaeda.
At Truthout.org, Robert Parry said:
Cheney surely knows that U.S. intelligence analysts have reached the opposite conclusions on both points - that there was no operational relationship between Hussein's regime and al-Qaeda...and that the U.S. occupation of Iraq has been a boon to al-Qaeda that the terrorist group wants to extend, not end.
And in the Washington Post, Richard Cohen said:
As for terrorism, the president made no mention of the apparent fact that the war in Iraq has proved a boon to terrorists. According to the International Institute for Strategic Studies, the war has been a recruiting tool for al Qaeda and other terrorist groups.
The invasion of Iraq has, indeed, served as a recruiting tool for al Qaeda, but it has been a propaganda disaster for them nonetheless. Many have overlooked this key point because they are so myopically focused on the fact that our invasion has caused religiously deranged fanatics from throughout the Muslim world to pack their suicide belts and head off to confront the Great Satan in Iraq. But when they get there, al Qaeda sends them to slaughter innocent Shiite civilians instead, and that has cost al Qaeda dearly. Just look at the Pew polling figures for confidence in Osama bin Laden in 2003 (the year in which the U.S. invaded Iraq) compared to 2007:
bp3.blogger.com +Ladin.jpg
Does that look like a propaganda victory to you? According to opponents of the invasion of Iraq, it wasn't supposed to happen this way. Instead, the invasion was supposed to inflame the passions of the Muslim world and push them closer to al Qaeda. Instead, they have turned against al Qaeda. They have also turned increasingly against al Qaeda's method of fighting their war against America, which consists of suicide bombings that target innocent civilians:
Can you imagine how interested the mainstream media would be in these results if the trends had gone in the opposite direction (like they were supposed to, darn it all)? Very, very interested. But because the results went the opposite way, it is a minor curiosity to them, and I suspect that most people are unaware of the trends. But regardless of what news professionals think, it is major news. The whole idea behind the invasion of Iraq was to turn the Muslim world against terror by offering democracy to them. As it turns out, they are turning against terror because of the methods used by al Qaeda to evict American forces from Iraq. It wasn't supposed to happen this way, but it is happening.
This is important to think about because, to my way of thinking, these poll results clarify the difference between the left and right on an extremely important issue. I believe that the thinking of those on the left is nicely summarized by this quote from Richard Clarke in his book Against All Enemies:
We and our values needed to be more appealing to Muslims than al Qaeda is. Far from addressing the popular appeal of the enemy that attacked us, Bush handed that enemy precisely what it wanted and needed, proof that America was at war with Islam, that we were the new Crusaders come to occupy Muslim land."
According to this way of thinking, the idea to get the Muslims to like us, hopefully more than they like al Qaeda. I think that might be why so many on the left seem to favor the Palestinians in their dispute with Israel (note that the Palestinians are still in love with Osama bin laden). Whether or not that is true, I do not know why people think it is important to "win the hearts and minds" of the Muslim world. So long as we support Israel's right to exist, the Muslim world will hate us, and that's fine with me. We don't need them to like us (much as I would like them to) any more than we need the French to like us. What we need is for the Muslim world to turn against terrorism, and that is precisely what has been happening since our invasion of Iraq.
But try to imagine what these poll results will show if al Qaeda succeeds in its efforts to defeat America in Iraq (i.e., if the Democrats get their way). That will be a real propaganda boon, the very propaganda boon that many on the left think they have detected all along. If, on the other hand, al Qaeda fails to achieve its objectives in Iraq, its reputation throughout the Muslim world is likely to sink even farther than it already has. They will have slaughtered thousands of Muslims and destroyed many of their mosques, all for naught. It will be their Vietnam.
You can blame Bush all you want, but the choice now is to surrender to al Qaeda in Iraq or to stay until they are defeated. To help you think through the consequences for al Qaeda, I'll quote from two sources that those on the left generally regard as credible. First, if we choose to lose by withdrawing our troops now, the Iraq Study Group depicted the consequences this way:
Al Qaeda will portray any failure by the United States in Iraq as a significant victory that will be featured prominently as they recruit for their cause in the region and around the world.
...
Al Qaeda would depict our withdrawal as a historic victory.
That's what a propaganda boon to al Qaeda will look like, and I further predict that the next Pew poll would show al Qaeda's standing to be massively elevated throughout the Muslim world. On the other hand, if we remain in Iraq until al Qaeda is defeated (and the trends right now are certainly against them), the declassified National Intelligence Estimate that was once wildly celebrated by Democrats said this:
Should jihadists leaving Iraq perceive themselves, and be perceived, to have failed, we judge fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight.
And I further predict that al Qaeda's standing in the Muslim world would fall even more dramatically than it already has. How anyone can believe otherwise (e.g., that it will harm al Qaeda if we leave Iraq on their terms) is a real mystery to me.
The choice is pretty clear, and the consequences for al Qaeda seem pretty clear as well. Al Qaeda's war against America in Iraq has been a propaganda disaster for them, and it is sure to hurt their cause in the long term. The question now is whether you want to complete that process so that "...fewer fighters will be inspired to carry on the fight" or to withdraw now so that al Qaeda can "...depict our withdrawal as a historic victory." That's your choice; take your pick.
POSTED BY ENGRAM AT 7/28/2007
engram-backtalk.blogspot.com
Re. the status of OBL, we don't know. Hasn't been seen in awhile so he could be dead. Looks like Zawahiri has been running AQ for some time. And yes, he's still alive. |
