December 10, 2008
Posted: 220 GMT

With Barack Obama preparing to assume the Presidency, it's a good time to cast around for neat descriptions of a changed world.

Gilles Kepel, author of 'Beyond Terror and Martyrdom'
Gilles Kepel, author of 'Beyond Terror and Martyrdom'

Gilles Kepel, a noted French scholar of Islam, has a succinct delineation of how things have changed in the seven years since 9/11, in a new book, Beyond Terror and Martyrdom.

Both of the grand narratives at work since the attacks on New York and Washington have run into the ground, he argues.

Those narratives were the Global War on Terror, the project of George W. Bush and the neocons, and the Global Jihad, as authored by Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri.

Both these narratives were intended to swing public opinion behind them – creating mass support within their respective constituencies for a highly aggressive, combative posture. Violence first; politics, maybe, later.

Both narratives, Kepel argues, foundered on the same issue: the occupation of Iraq. The United States succeeded in creating a new army of jihadists able to cripple all efforts at rebuilding the country, at least until the twin developments of the military surge and the Sunni Awakening, by which time the U.S. had long since lost the argument anyway.

And for Al Qaeda, the bloodshed unleashed by its leader in Iraq, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi, was such that jihad became fitna. Put crudely, holy war became civil war. The horrendous violence between Sunni and Shi'a had a profoundly alienating effect across the Muslim world and support for bin Laden declined sharply.

The great irony resulting from this mutual ideological knockout is the rise of a foe shared equally by AQ and the US: Iran.

Kepel's not the first to put forward this line of argument but it is, among other things, a very tidy encapsulation of the law of unintended consequences. Otherwise known as the cock-up theory of history.

Posted by: ,
Filed under: Al Qaeda


Share this on:
mark l holland   December 26th, 2008 445 GMT

What we will need to do in Iraq is start a civil war between the Sunnis's and Shia. We Can use a number of countries to funnel weapons and training to the Sunnies get a full blown civil war going between the two. It is doubtfull that Iran would move into Iraq if a full force shooting war was going on between the sunnies and shia.

And if Iran was informed that any Iranian military forces moving into Iraq would be attacked it is unlikely that they would commit full military force to take over Iraq. So long as Iraq is in a committed civil war it is unlikely that Iran would commit forces to it's defence. To get out of Iraq without Iran taking over we need a good old civil war.

Leave Your Comment


 

Comments are moderated by CNN, in accordance with the CNN Comment Policy, and may not appear on this blog until they have been reviewed and deemed appropriate for posting. Also, due to the volume of comments we receive, not all comments will be posted.


subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Paula Newton and Andrew CareyNews and observations on the threats to international security and the challenges posed by terrorism to societies around the world. By CNN's International Security Correspondent, Paula Newton, and International Security Producer, Andrew Carey. From breaking news to background stories, from serious analysis to casual asides, if we think it's interesting we'll post it here.

Categories
Powered by WordPress.com VIP