The War Within Islam

Several recent articles in The New Yorker, The New Republic, and Newsweek have explored the growing rifts within and between Muslim extremist factions over the use of violence against civilians in the waging of jihad. A major al Qaeda theorist and former comrade of Ayman al-Zawahiri's, Sayyid Imam al-Sharif, has condemned al Qaeda's terrorism as un-Islamic. In Newsweek, Christopher Dickey and Owen Matthews write that "important Muslim thinkers, including some on whom bin Laden depended for support, have rejected his vision." This debate within the jihadist community was ongoing well before 9/11, but has become more pronounced as Arab publics have expressed revulsion at al Qaeda's brutality against civilians in Iraq, Pakistan, and elsewhere. While it is important not to overstate the ideological cleavage within al Qaeda (its Islamist critics do not question the justice of resistance in Iraq, the Palestinian Territories, or Afghanistan, only the tactics used), this is certainly a welcome phenomenon, which the United States should encourage as much as possible. These developments offer a rebuke to President Bush's anti-terrorism policies, as they demonstrate that victory against al Qaeda's ideology will not come from the barrel of an American gun but from the condemnation of fellow Muslims. 

CONSERVATIVES MISREPRESENT THE EVIDENCE: In the past several weeks, several prominent conservative voices, including the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post's Fred Hiatt, and former Bush administration officials, have conflated the revolt within jihadist groups with recent events in Iraq to falsely represent them as a vindication of the Bush administration's so-called "war on terror," and to argue for staying the course in Iraq. A May 31 Wall Street Journal editorial cited CIA Director Michael Hayden’s acknowledgment of "significant setbacks for al Qaeda globally" and then claimed that "the U.S. offensives in Afghanistan and especially Iraq deserve most of the credit." On June 1, the Washington Post's editorial page, which has long supported the Iraq war, joined in, celebrating "the Iraqi upturn," praising the recent successes of the U.S. and Iraqi armies against al Qaeda in Iraq, but ignoring the fact that the stated goal of the surge -- political reconciliation -- has not been met. The focus on the drop on violence, welcome as it is, also obscures the fact that increased Iraqi security has come through the creation of numerous Sunni militias that express no loyalty to the central government. Peter Wehner, a former assistant to Bush, wrote that "the tide within the Islamic world is turning strongly against al Qaeda and jihadism," and gave credit to "the success of the Petraeus-led strategy in Iraq." Wehner also claimed last March that "large drops in support for Mr bin Laden...have occurred since the Iraq war began."  

MISREADING AL QAEDA'S APPEAL: What all these conservative war supporters neglect to mention is that support among Arabs and Muslims for bin Laden initially skyrocketed as a result of the Iraq war. Mass revulsion at al Qaeda's murderous tactics in Iraq has also come at the cost of the lives of thousands of Iraqi civilians, and cannot be counted as a policy success except by the most cynical political calculus. Al Qaeda's ideology has always been a marginal one in the Islamic world. Its severe interpretation of Islam is unpopular among the vast majority of Muslims. To the extent that al Qaeda had any significant status among Muslims, the group was effectively promoted to this status by Bush when he cast al Qaeda as the opposing force in a new world war. The fact that even strict Islamists are now turning against the terrorist groups' brutality shows the simplistic conservative characterization of the "Islamofascist" threat to be false. In as much as these critiques are being generated from within Islamism, they represent a pointed refutation of the conservative "clash of civilizations" ideology that underpins the war on terror, and which was used to justify the invasion and occupation of Iraq.

OBSCURING POLICY FAILURES: The continuing commitment of American energy and resources to Iraq has also had negative consequences for the battle against the core leadership of al Qaeda and a resurgent Taliban in Afghanistan. The Center for American Progress's Colin Cookman wrote last week that "US and foreign intelligence agencies have reached a strikingly unanimous conclusion that the core organizational leadership [of al Qaeda] has re-formed itself" in Pakistan. The New Republic reported that al Qaeda "has regrouped and is now able to launch significant terrorist operations in Europe." Last summer's National Intelligence Estimate also stated that al Qaeda had "regenerated its [U.S.] Homeland attack capability" in Pakistan's tribal areas. NATO continues to be short of the troops needed to support the struggling Afghan government. In February, Director of National Intelligence Mike McConnell said the same safe haven in Pakistan that has enabled al Qaeda to regroup has allowed the Taliban to "train, recruit, rest and recuperate and then come back into Afghanistan." These developments pose an immediate threat to U.S. interests, a threat which has been allowed to grow as the attention of U.S. leaders has been focused on Iraq. 

The U.S. government has opened its first permanent office in Baghdad for "Iraqi refugees seeking to settle in the United States, responding to criticism that the Bush administration has failed to help thousands of Iraqis whose lives are in danger because of their work with American organizations."

NEW YORK: "Five state lawmakers, backed by a conservative Christian policy group," sued Gov. David Paterson (D) yesterday, seeking to block his recent directive on same-sex marriages.

TEXAS: "[A] battle looms in Texas over science textbooks that teach evolution."

NEVADA: The Energy Department has "applied for a license for the first national repository for spent nuclear fuel and high-level radioactive waste at Nevada's Yucca Mountain."

THINK PROGRESS: Former senator Sam Nunn reconsiders "Don't Ask, Don't Tell": "Times change," may be "appropriate" to lift the ban on gays in the military.

WONK ROOM: The New York Times uses Sen. James Inhofe's (R-OK) anti-cap-and-trade talking points.

RIGHT WING WATCH: Former White House Press Secretary Scott McClellan admits that controversial pastor John Hagee had "influence" in the Bush White House.

NUKES & SPOOKS: Analysis: May marks the most violent month in Afghanistan since 2001.

"Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice escalated the Bush administration's anti-Iran rhetoric on Tuesday...calling any dialogue with its leaders pointless until they suspend the country's enrichment of uranium."
-- New York Times, 6/4/08

VERSUS

"Cosgriff [said] that the US and Soviet navies had benefited from contacts during the Cold War. Asked whether similar contacts between the US and Iran navies would be useful, he said: 'I think they would.'"
-- Financial Times interview with Adm. Kevin Cosgriff, top U.S. Naval commander in the Middle East, 6/4/08