Soccer Dad

Changing tides in the war on terror

Two months ago Paul Berman wrote, Why Radical Islam just won't Die. In it he lamented:

But that was then. In today’s Middle East, the various radical Islamists, basking in their success, paint their liberal rivals and opponents as traitors to Muslim civilization, stooges of crusader or Zionist aggression. And, weirdly enough, all too many intellectuals in the Western countries have lately assented to those preposterous accusations, in a sanitized version suitable for Western consumption.

Even in the Western countries, quite a few Muslim liberals, the outspoken ones, live today under a threat of assassination, not to mention a reality of character assassination. Ayaan Hirsi Ali, the Somali-Dutch legislator and writer, is merely an exceptionally valiant example. But instead of enjoying the unstinting support of their non-Muslim colleagues, the Muslim liberals find themselves routinely berated in the highbrow magazines and the universities as deracinated nonentities, alienated from the Muslim world. Or they find themselves pilloried as stooges of the neoconservative conspiracy — quite as if any writer from a Muslim background who fails to adhere to at least a few anti-imperialist or anti-Zionist tenets of the Islamist doctrine must be incapable of thinking his or her own thoughts.

However, in a recent column Fareed Zakaria points to a study that claims that terrorism is down worldwide.

The Simon Fraser study notes that the decline in terrorism appears to be caused by many factors, among them successful counterterrorism operations in dozens of countries and infighting among terror groups. But the most significant, in the study's view, is the "extraordinary drop in support for Islamist terror organizations in the Muslim world over the past five years." These are largely self-inflicted wounds. The more people are exposed to the jihadists' tactics and world view, the less they support them. An ABC/BBC poll in Afghanistan in 2007 showed support for the jihadist militants in the country to be 1 percent. In Pakistan's North-West Frontier province, where Al Qaeda has bases, support for Osama bin Laden plummeted from 70 percent in August 2007 to 4 percent in January 2008. That dramatic drop was probably a reaction to the assassination of Benazir Bhutto, but it points to a general trend in Pakistan over the past five years. With every new terrorist attack, public support for jihad falls. "This pattern is repeated in country after country in the Muslim world," writes Mack. "Its strategic implications are critically important because historical evidence suggests that terrorist campaigns that lose public support will sooner or later be abandoned or defeated."

And an article in the New Republic, the Unraveling (via memeorandum) makes similar observations.

In December, Al Qaeda's campaign of violence reached new depths in the eyes of many Muslims, with a plot to launch attacks in Saudi Arabia while millions were gathered for the Hajj. Saudi security services arrested 28 Al Qaeda militants in Mecca, Medina, and Riyadh, whose targets allegedly included religious leaders critical of Al Qaeda, among them the Saudi Grand Mufti Sheikh Abd Al Aziz Al Sheikh, who responded to the plot by ruling that Al Qaeda operatives should be punished by execution, crucifixion, or exile. Plotting such attacks during the Hajj could not have been more counterproductive to Al Qaeda's cause, says Abdullah Anas, who was making the pilgrimage to Mecca himself. "People over there ... were very angry. The feeling was, how was it possible for Muslims to do that? I still can't quite believe it myself. The mood was one of shock, real shock."

According to these articles, the brutality of Al Qaeda had turned many Muslims - including one-time supporters, against the organization. But neither article claims that bringing the fight against terror to the Middle East, in any way weakened Al Qaeda.

To be sure Zakaria seems to dance around this point. He argues that reports showing an increase in terror focus too much in Iraq. But that implies that the forces of terror have focused their efforts on Iraq, in essence confirming that there's been a "flypaper" effect. Admitting that explicitly, would mean that Zakaria would have to credit President Bush, something, I suspect, he has no interest in doing.

Still despite the claims with (Zakaria) or without (TNR) numbers, one does have to be careful before embracing the idea that terrorism is down. Daniel Pipes showed, a few years ago, that a State Department report making that claim was highly politicized. While the report claiming that terrorism has decreased is heartening, it must be viewed with some skepticism.

Still Gordon Chang points out that America must continue to lead the fight.

UPDATE: More thoughts at Instapundit.

terrorism

Posted by SoccerDad at May 26, 2008 6:44 AM