Malcolm Nance has a new book out, An End to al-Qaeda: Destroying Bin Laden's Jihad and Restoring America's Honor.
He discussed the book yesterday in
this clip on the
Rachel Maddow show. If you suffer through the wacky "security briefing"
intro, you'll get a chance to hear him nicely frame our loss of initiative to Al
Qaeda in defining the IO battlefield. As far as the how and what
we can do to change that and defeat them in the next 24 months? I
guess we'll have to buy the book and read quickly. :) The
clock is ticking.
Speaking of ticking, Maddow's site links in to Malcolm's
on the show as it took on the "ticking time bomb" argument for torture.
Each time he hits the headlines, a few more people connect the dots and run into
his Fall 2007 post here stating
Waterboarding is Torture, Period. We continue to appreciate that
clarity.
Comments
Robert C. Jones:
""Poor Governance" is defined here as some combination of the following four causal perceptions among significant segments of the governed populace"
I don't mean to be cheeky, but what was the fourth causal perception? You only listed three.
I am curious to see you elaborate on your premise. From what you have described, perhaps a better term would be "just government," since the causal perceptions you cite all seem to describe a sense of grievance.
In a nutshell, people are hungry for "Good Governance" and the U.S. is widely perceived as promoting regimes in the Middle East with famously "Poor Governance"
"Poor Governance" is defined here as some combination of the following four causal perceptions among significant segments of the governed populace:
Illegitimacy - the current governance does not draw its legitimacy from a recognized source.
Injustice - the rule of law applied is not viewed as just.
Disrespect - certain individuals or groups are treated with less respect than others as a matter of status.
Hopelessness - the lack of a trusted and certain means for the governed to shape their governance.
What AQ sells is the perception that the U.S. is what stands between their target populaces and achieving Good Governance. If AQ is defeated, some other organization will replace them and continue addressing the needs of this vast target audiance.
I have submitted a paper to the Council that fleshes this out in greater detail.
Robert C. Jones:
Sir: With respect, you still seem to be beating around the bush.
Why not just tell us -- straight up -- what you believe to be the "market" that (1) AQ appeals to and (2) which we seem to be ignoring.
Please tell us: What exactly is the "basic, fundamental human need" that you suggest is being denied.
Inform us, specifically, as to (1) what these people are hungry for and (2) how is it that the West -- and their local governments -- deny these people this basic human need.
Your insight, thoughts and suggestions, I believe, are critically important.
But we need to know exactly what you are referring to -- in order to be able to move forward -- and address these issues in a meaningful and effective manner.
Thank you very much for this consideration.
In simplest terms; things exist for a reason, be it a business or an insurgency, or an international terrorist organization. Easy to create, but to flourish requires a Market.
Burger King doesn't sell a ba-zillion burgers today because they came up with an marketing ideology of "Have it your way." They also built there stores next to McDonalds whereever possible to be where people were hungry for hamburgers.
There is a vast swath of humanity that is hungry for what AQ is selling. If AQ goes out of business because it has become too associated with violence, or becuase that violence brought too much counter-violence back on them the market will still be there.
We must address the market. WHY are so many, largely quite reasonable, people so hungry for what AQ is selling? Everybody is focused on the sizzle, and ignoring the steak.
So, just as Burger King is a "symptom" of people being hungry for burgers, with being hungry being a fundamental human need. You have to ask, "What fundamental human needs are not being met by the governances of the countries most AQ members come from, and why is it they feel they must attack the U.S. and the West in order to have that need met?"
I could be dead wrong, but I don't think its all about the ideology or the fact that they are largely Muslim. If this was going on at a NASCAR event they would be largely white and drink Busch Lite. I think we draw some flawed conclusions because they fit our predisposed ideas of how we see ourselves.
Robert C. Jones:
Sir: Would you mind explaining your position in just a little more detail.
For example:
a. What specifically do you believe is the "root cause" that AQ uses its ideology to rally support for?
b. Likewise, if AQ is but a "symptom" of an underlying "disease," what specifically is this disease that we can find by "looking down at where we stand first?"
Thanks.
Personally, I take the position that the role of ideology in the AQ movement has been grossly over-emphasized by most Western analysts; and largely misunderstood as well.
Like all movements of this type, AQ employs ideology to rally support to their cause, but the ideology is not the cause itself.
To destroy AQ without first addressing their purpose for existing, is merely to open the way for a more sophisticated, and quite possibly more dangerous, competitor.
Conclusion:
Discrediting the ideology of economic communism certainly played an important role in the recent pro-market/pro-global economy transformations of the "great civilizations" of Russia and China.
Discrediting the ideology of Al Qaeda, likewise, would certainly go a long way in helping to further the transformation of the "great civilization" of the Middle East/Muslim World (thus making these regions, also, more safe and more conducive to global economic initiatives).
In the case of the Middle East/Muslim World, however, unlike the cases of Russia and China above, we have no indigenous central governing body to convince, co-opt and do our transformational bidding, and must work, instead, with innumeral different, diverse and often rival factions to achieve these goals.
And, thus, these important processes (the descrediting of Al Qaeda and the further transformation of the Middle East/Muslim World) are made more difficult and more complex.
Addendum:
In the cases of transforming Russia and China, we were fortunate enough to have indigenous central "great power" governing bodies -- who we were able to convince to do our bidding.
This allowed that these indigenous governing bodies would, for us, but essentially by themselves, bring about, orchestrate, enforce and police the desired "great civilization" changes (from the communist economic model to the capitalist/global economy-servicing model).
We are less fortunate with regards to the Middle East and other such areas of the world.
Herein, we have no indigenous "great power" central governing body to do our bidding and assume this burden.
And, thus, we are forced to assume this "great power" role ourselves and attempt, largely by ourselves, to bring about this next required "great civilization" change.
However, in our case (the Middle East/Muslim World), we will have to do this in an ad-hoc, case-by-case and one-nation (or even one-tribe)-at-a-time manner.
Our central problem in this endeavor is that we lack (1) the requisite legitimacy and (2) the necessary capability -- to pull this off.
Herein it is important to understand: That in the recent "great civilization" changes that were made in Russia and China, these were largely seen as local/indigenous projects.
Wherein, in the Middle East/Muslim World, this new attempt at "great civilization" change -- by the United States -- is largely seen as an undertaking of a foreign/enemy entity.
Root Cause: Looking Down Where We Stand:
----- The United States' desire and imperative to maintain and expand the liberal world economic order. -----
We view this as a very positive thing; something that benefits, not only ourselves and our allies, but the entire rest of the world.
This central focus is both the United States' raison d'etre and casus belli.
Accordingly, those that are with us on this matter, we consider our friends and allies; while those who would disagee with us on this initiative (and would fight back accordingly) we consider our enemies.
Thus, the source of our difficulties in the Middle East and elsewhere in the world.
Herschel,
The state assembly of Punjab (Pakistan) or NWFP (Don't remember exactly which one) was in uproar few years back because 'Jihad is religious duty against infidels' was removed from History books. They only cooled down when the Education minister told them that it has been removed from History and put in the Biology books. So it is not just the madarasa that need to change.
Regards,
Sid
AQ is but a symptom, not the disease itself. God help us if AQ is defeated, because as we chase the symptoms, it won't be by us. It will be by a smarter, more capable, more dangerous, "Symptom Mark II".
From just the blurb offered, this guy sounds like part of the "destroy the symptom" crowd.
Suppress the symptom, certainly, but focus your effort on the root causes. Not much interest in root causes though. Its far to fun and easy to debate about "counterterrorism", "Islamism", and "Global Insurgencies." We need to stop haveing fun, and get serious about getting past the symptoms to the root cuases. And when looking for roots, it is best to start by looking down at where you stand first.
(Oh, and even a brilliant "roots" based approach will take a generation to really take hold.)
Fanciful daydreaming. Until the Madrassas in Pakistan (Karachi, NWFP, FATA) stop churning out globalists, killing UBL, Mullah Omar, capturing Baradar, etc., is all just holding back the flood waters. Like Gollum in Lord of the Rings, this counterbalance to "evil" Indian power is "precious" to the Paks - or so the pathological Pak mind reasons.
Nance is correct in observing that Al Qaeda can be destroyed within two years if we discredit its ideology. However, his proposal that Al Qaeda seeks to rewrite the Islamic faith is a commonly voiced observation that has not compelled many Al Qaeda supporters to abandon the movement. What we need is an information operation that convinces these supporters that Al Qaeda is far more dangerous to them than "Western imperialism" or moderate Islam.
Could Al Qaeda be destroyed if we disclose proof that its leadership is an apocalyptic cult seeking to ignite a war that kills billions of people? A new low-cost information operation promises to develop the Muslim intelligence sources necessary for dismantling Bin Laden's terrorist syndicate.
Read the complete thesis that will destroy Al Qaeda at:
www.binladensplan.com/Our_Purpose.htm
Peace on Earth,
David Malone
Author/Peace Activist
Binladensplan.com is a nonprofit public awareness campaign dedicated to defeating Al Qaeda on the ideological battlefield.