Al-Qaeda Terrorist Group
Introduction
There is every indication that America remains under the imminent and constant threat of an attack from Al Qaeda. The Terrorist group has members mostly in the valleys and mountains of Pakistan, the tribal lands of Afghanistan, the remote areas of Maghreb in African Sahara, and Yemen along the border with Saudi Arabia. The group is also very visible in various political awakenings in Yemen, Bahrain, Egypt, Tunisia, Syria, and Libya (Kaaki 1). Though the group is famous for the attack on America to the World Trade Center on 11th September 2001, a terrorist group that has a rich history and background makes it impossible to wipe out. Al Qaeda and its affiliates have been carrying out sophisticated attacks though media campaigns from the mid-1990s through various audio recordings, faxed documents, internet postings, and video appearances (Blanchard 1). These attacks were designed to elicit psychological reactions from the public, and sub-populations in the Islamic world, Europe, Asia, and the U.S. (Hafez 96). This research discusses the history, rise, and goals of the group, its effect to America. The analysis also discusses how deep-rooted goals and ideals, make it difficult for the federal government to defeat the group.
History, Rise, and Rhetoric
Al Qaeda was created on the 11th August 1988 following a meeting between Bin Laden, Dr. Fadl, and Zawahiri in Peshawar Pakistan (Wander 1). This meeting brought together massive Saudi wealth, expertise of militants, and the philosophical foundations of Jihad from an intellectual to form the dreaded group. Al Qaeda’s founding principles are based on its leader, Osama Bin Laden’s experiences with logistical coordination and financing of Arab and Afghan resistance to Soviet invasion in the 1980s (Blanchard 3). This experience was on his Islamic background that Muslims could have effective military steps inspired by a few Islamic principles. The group therefore followed Bin Laden’s conservative Islamic view, with puritan salafist Islamic reform agendas. This lead the group to embrace the principle that there was a need for Muslim societies to arm themselves in an armed resistance in the wake of perceived aggression, based on the Islamic “defensive jihad” (Blanchard 3). This concept was then fueled by the U.S. attack on Iraq in 1991 following Iraq’s occupation of Kuwait. It was the gulf war in the early 1990s that is believed to be the fuel for Al Qaeda’s “defensive jihad” attacks against enemies like U.S. and the Saudi government.
Through the sophisticated public relations media messages, Osama led al Qaeda to make open and critical statements against the Saudi royal family for allegedly inviting foreign troops into the Arab Peninsula. Therefore, the leader called the group to secure the withdrawal of foreign troops in this case American troops from Saudi Arabia at all costs (Blanchard 3). The group was led on the rhetoric that the foreign troops had desecrated the sanctity of Islamic birthplace and had betrayed the global Islamic community. Osama was exiled by Saudi leaders to Afghanistan and Sudan, where he increased his radical views. It was not until 1996 that Osama declared Jihad on U.S., which propelled him and Al Qaeda to the international eye, as he declared America was an enemy to alliance of Christians, Jews, and their agents (Hafez 96). The rhetoric also pointed out that America support Israel, influenced international sanctions on Iraq, led to many massacres in Burma, Tajikistan, Kashmir, Philippines, Assam, Ogaden, Chechnya, Eretria, Somalia, Fatani, and Bosnia-Herzegovina (Blanchard 4). The leader declared that these were signs of the growing war U.S. had initiated against Islam.
Based on this rhetoric Al Qaeda made several statements, which expanded its scope and vision in its declared conflict with the U.S. and specified its political prescriptions for reforming the Islamic world. Al Qaeda adopted the theory of Samuel Huntington on the class of civilizations causing the “new crusade led by America against Islamic nations” (Fisk 1). The theory led to the belief that the war between the West and Islam will be, “between Americans and their allies and the Islamic world” (Fisk 1). Bin Laden then requested the Islamic world to look for a leader to lead it in defending its seamless Islamic community, where the Islamic community is united in one to fight a common enemy.
To unite Muslims under the banner of Al Qaeda, Bin Laden used traditional Islamic religion authority by issuing a “fatwa” in 1998, which a religious edict that declares the U.S. made a clear declaration of war against God, Muslims, and his messenger Mohamad (Fisk 1). Therefore, Muslims in the group and supporting the group followed the defensive jihad and the fatwa to seek aggression with armed resistance and targeting attacks on civilian and military personnel in Islam world. It was at this point that Al Qaeda also gave birth to the statement, “The World Islamic Front for Jihad against the Jews and Crusaders” and led to a coalition with various Islamic militants across the Islamic world (Blanchard 4).
In the end, the religious rhetoric led the group to be founded on three main foundations or perspectives. The first is the Quran-Based authority of governance, in which the group supports Islamic states governed primarily by the Shariah law. This therefore, bans secular or man-made governments and laws from the Islamic world as they are contrary to the Islamic faith (Hafez 96). The second perspective is “the Liberation of the Homelands,” in which reforms and free election are not possible until the establishment of the freedom for Muslim lands from the aggressor. This also emphasizes the need for the control over the energy resources of the Middle East, associated by Islamists as important to Israel’s nuclear arsenal (Fisk 1). The third perspective is “the Liberation of the Human Being,” in which contractual social relationships between rulers and Muslims permits people to criticize and choose leaders. The third perspective also requires that Muslims can overthrow and resist their rulers that violate the principles and laws of Islam (Blanchard 4). Al Qaeda following the third perspective hates hereditary government, and identifies the need to specify the power of Shariah based judiciary, to ensure that no one is disposes the rights of the people.
Effects and Results of Al Qaeda’s Ideology
This was the beginning of the Al Qaeda terrorist group activities, as its religious and defensive rhetoric led it to attack those allied to the U.S. The first major attack, internationally recognized was the bombing of the Gold Mihor Hotel in Aden, that killed two people (Wander 1). The second notable attack was the killing of 18 U.S. servicemen in the Black Hawk Down operation in Somalia, as it is believed Al Qaeda fighters assisted those who shot down the helicopters. The attack was later attributed to Al Qaeda by Dr Fadl’s manuscript “The Compendium of the Pursuit of Divine Knowledge,” which later turns out to be the group’s murderous campaign (Wander 1). Later in 1996, Bin Laden gets back to Afghanistan where he creates a tight relationship with the new Taliban Movement Leader Omar Mullah. It is at this time the Al Qaeda militant groups under imprisonment in Egypt begin to renounce violence, leading to their withdrawal in 1997. This withdrawal leads the angry Zawahiri to lead an attack on Egypt, which saw 62 people killed by gunmen on 17 November 1997 at Luxor (Wander 1).Bin Laden then issues the fatwa that declares war against the U.S. and its citizens and interests. This then led to the simultaneous bombings on 7 August 1998 on U.S. embassies in Tanzania and Kenya, which killed 223 people (Wander 1). Later on the 20 August 1998, America retaliates by taking strike actions against the group by attacking Afghanistan and Sudan. These military actions do not hinder nor reduce Al Qaeda’s missions, but seem to infuriate them (Blanchard 5). It is believed, that as a reaction to U.S. led strikes on Afghanistan and Sudan, the Al Qaeda ram a small vessel onto the U.S.S. Cole in 2000 in Yemen. It is believed that in preparation for the major strike, Bin Laden’s Al Qaeda and Zawahiri’s Al-Jihad joined hands on June 2001 (Wander 1). Inevitably, Al Qaeda carried out its most deadly attack within a couple of months of the amalgamation on the World Trade centers and Washington, that led to the loss of 2,974 people.
In some of the attacks, Bin Laden did not take direct responsibility, but made claims that he did approve and shared motivations by those that carried out the attacks. It was not until the attacks on New York and Washington, that Bin Laden openly declared that Al Qaeda was responsible, and he did support the hijackers (Blanchard 6). Al Qaeda claimed that the attacks were a series of strikes on U.S. targets and were a defensive motivated response to America’s aggression in the Islam world. Al Qaeda through its leaders Bin Laden and Zawahiri made subsequent statements after 2001 on the continued attacks on the U.S. Al Qaeda made statements that it would continually attack since western societies were morally corrupt, had bankrupt and insincere democratic and human rights reforms. Therefore, Al Qaeda declared that it was time that American and British civilization was accountable for their democratic policies for their democratically elected Middle East governments, the group objected.
Effect of Government’s Reactions to Al Qaeda
It is noteworthy to comment that a review of the historical development of Al Qaeda reveals that it was formed as a reaction to U.S. led war on Terror in the second half of 1990s (Kaaki 2). The groups subsequent attacks and eventual terrorist actions on September 11 2001, led the U.S. to retaliate by sending troops into Afghanistan, the home of Al Qaeda, in October 2001 (Atran 34). The U.S. made a commitment to fight terror and all forms of terrorism, and began its campaign on the territories of Afghanistan, which intelligence revealed were the headquarters, training ground, and home to thousands of Taliban and Al Qaeda forces (Blanchard 7). The counter terrorist actions were founded of President George Bush’s counter terrorist policies that gave the war a foundation, justification, and ethical basis.
The policies where the administrations rhetoric and drawing forces and allied support in the fight against terrorism. This was identified since the continued targeted strikes against the U.S. were persistent and led to the administration’s actions in retaliation to 9/11. The U.S. had been using the targeted attacks prior to 9/11 as a means to respond to Al Qaeda (Geltzer 32). Al Qaeda launched the 9/11 attack after several attempts by President Clinton’s Administration to use Tomahawk cruise missiles on Afghanistan and Sudanese chemical weapon factory. Therefore, it is evident that counter terrorism attacks fuel increased terrorism attack. After 9/11 several missile strikes, unmanned predator drones were sent on November 2002, to kill an alleged chief of Al Qaeda in Yemen. While F-16 fighter jets were sent to kill Al Zawahiri the leader of Al Qaeda working with Pakistani military in June 2006. Moreover, the government along with its allies made key arrests of Al Qaeda suspects and leaders across the globe, many of them from Afghanistan, Pakistan, Africa, Europe, and Asia (Geltzer 23). Apart from arrests and air strikes, the U.S. later made a full pledged war against Al Qaeda on Iraq and Afghanistan. However, the attack on Iraq and the consequent arrest and hanging of Saddam Hussein has been controversial in the war to terror. To justify these actions several judiciary, military, diplomatic, organizational, economic, and psychological fronts were created by the government against Al Qaeda.
In the process, the government made use of the PATRIOT Act on the use of America’s military force, which increased the federal law enforcement authority (Getlzer 33). Secondly, apart from military actions abroad, the government increased the homeland security mandate, which gathered support from the public using psychological influences. Americans at the time were angered by the attack on 9/11 therefore did not at first question the government’s actions. Later, following the increment of surveillance on citizens and homeland security, the rhetoric of continued “attack” was promoted on mass media (Getlzer 33). The involvement of allies like Britain assisted in the elimination of Taliban and Al Qaeda rule in Afghanistan, but increased terrorist attacks like the London Bombings and the insurgence in Ira and Afghanistan.
Therefore, this research finds that the U.S. counter terrorism attacks on Afghanistan and Iraq in 2001 in retaliation to 9/11 attacks has led to a series of attacks. Counter terrorism has only succeeded in eliminating the main leaders of Al Qaeda, and scattered its forces, but the strong rhetoric set by Osama bin Laden still fuel small targets and insurgence efforts (Atran 34). The smaller targets and insurgence efforts are the retaliations of several splinter groups or groups formed by Al Qaeda militants across the globe. These series of attacks are evident as if the U.S. invaded Iraq and ousted Saddam Hussein on 20 March 2003, to prevent the production of weapons of mass destruction. This led to the killing of civilians in a wave of bombings in Saudi Arabia’s Riyadh, targeting compounds with foreigners. Later, on the 16 March 45 people were killed in a suicide bombing in Casablanca (Wander 1). Later on the 20 December, British interests in Turkey are bombed, killing 27 people. The bombings in Casablanca were the actions of Al Qaeda’s successor group, which though not well structured still pose serious damages since their composition is Muslims with Islamic militarism and violence. Counter terrorism nor the arrest of key Al Qaeda leaders did not succeed in getting rid of the group, which seems to have transformed and increased its anti-America sentiments (Wander 1). This is seen in the attacks on 11 March 2004 in Madrid that left 191 people killed, with more than 2,000 injured. In addition, this awakened new hope for the group as the Jordanian militant Musab Abu Al-Zarqawi pledges allegiance to the group establishing it in Iraq. Later on 7 July 2005, 52 people are killed in a public transport system in the U.K. (Wander 1). The London bombings revealed that the war on terror was still on, as the perpetrators were British born Muslims who received training from camps in Pakistan. Following the capture and death of Saddam Hussein and Osama bin Laden, the government has reduced the number of stacks by Al-Qaeda (Wander 1). The most significant losses are those felt by Americans deployed in war torn areas where insurgence is prevalent. On the other hand, America is winning the war on terror following government hacker’s success in infiltrating several Al Qaeda sites with American propaganda.
Works Cited
Atran, Scott. Talking to the Enemy: Faith, Brotherhood, and the (un)making of Terrorists. New York: Ecco Press, 2010. Print.
Blanchard, Christopher M. Al Qaeda: Statements and Evolving Ideology. CRS Report Order RL32759, 9 July, 2007. WEB. http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32759.pdf. 28 Nov 2012.
Fisk, Robert, “Interview with Saudi Dissident Bin Laden” Independent (London), July 10, 1996.
Geltzer, Joshua A. U.S. Counter-Terrorism Strategy and Al-Qaeda: Signaling and the Terrorist World-View. New York, NY: Routledge, 2010. Print.
Hafez, Mohammed M. “Martyrdom Mythology in Iraq: How Jihadists Frame Suicide Terrorism in Videos and Biographies”. Terrorism and Political Violence, 19.1 (2010): 95–115.
Kaaki, Lisa. The Rise and Fall of al-Qaeda. McClatchy, Tribune Business News, 30 Nov 2011.
Wander, Andrew. A History of Terror: Al-Qaeda 1988-2008. The Guardian. 13 July 2008. Web. http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/jul/13/history.alqaida. 28 Nov 2012.
