Obama and Al Qaeda

The Middle East Times ran a "special report" November 12 saying that while some not-so-welcome endorsements for an Obama presidency came in after the November 4 presidential election, including support from Hamas and Iranian president Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, one actor that was notably silent was Al Qaeda.

The Times says, "The total absence of comments from the United States' number one enemy, whom the Bush administration has been trying to track down and eradicate ever since the Sept. 11, 2001 terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center in New York and the Pentagon in Washington, is somewhat strange. One would think that this might have been a good opportunity for bin Laden to gloat. After all, he outlasted his nemesis."

But then the report offers an explanation for the silence: that al Qaeda might be "at a loss for words." It is unlikely that bin Laden's terrorist organization would openly support a candidate (I'm talking top leadership like bin Laden and Zawahiri, not lower level commanders or foot soldiers). Kim Ghattas, a BBC correspondent, told the Times that "Al-Qaida's top leaders have been silent so far though some expect them to claim Mr. Obama's election as their victory, and a defeat of President Bush's policies." But, Ghattas says, al Qaeda "...may have to rethink how they deal with the 'Great Satan,' if global goodwill persists."

It is unlikely, in my opinion, that bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri are at a loss for words. It is much more likely that they are weighing their options and evaluating their strategy. Bin Laden's original intent was to draw the United States into a major conflict in the heart of the Middle East. He succeeded in that endeavor. The second part of his strategy, though, was to effect a mass uprising of the ummah, the Muslim community, against secular governments in the region allied with or cooperating with the Americans. This part of the strategy has failed. I have no doubt that the way ahead is being reviewed.

The Times mentions Vice President-elect Joe Biden's warning of a "test" in the first six months of an Obama administration, but that timeline is flexible depending on al Qaeda's planning cycle. Al Qaeda's senior leaders are incredibly patient. The attacks on the World Trade Center in 1993 and 2001 were meticulously planned for years. The other factor to consider is the operational capability of the senior leadership. For the last 7 years, bin Laden and Zawahiri have done little more than look over their shoulders for American troops hunting them down.

Al Qaeda as it existed on 9/11 is no longer. The terrorist group has decentralized into regional and local groups and cells that are largely disconnected from the original al Qaeda leadership.

Does this mean al Qaeda will not launch an attack on the United States proper? No one knows for sure. But attempting to read bin Laden's intent is a bit off base without considering fully the current strategy and capability of the original al Qaeda.