L'Occidentale

A response to this article: http://www.raymondibrahim.com/7605/come-battere-lhydra-dellislam-radicale

Raymond Ibrahim ha ragione a sostenere che l'Islam radicale e jihadista è immenso e che il suo fanatismo è come un ventre sempre gravido; ha ragione a dire che non ci sono limiti, oggi, alla sua possibilità di produrre nuovi terroristi, e di fatto è ciò che accade in tutto il mondo.
La sua idea di "cauterizzare" le ferite dell'Idra dalla mille teste sempre capaci di rigenerarsi è appunto il problema che attanaglia chiunque sia in lotta col terrore. Come farlo? Innanzitutto si tratta certo di chiudere i finanziamenti delle organizzazioni e degli Stati terroristi: il blocco dei fondi e dei commerci legati a quelle e a questi è indispensabile, e perciò è così importante che, per esempio, non solo che si attuino le sanzioni stabilite dall'ONU nei confronti dell'Iran, ma che le banche e le industrie che negli Stati Uniti e in Europa hanno a che fare con l'Iran, scelgano con difficile autodeterminazione di tagliare scambi talvolta anche molto lucrosi. Con gli USA avviene già in abbondanza, speriamo che anche anche l'Italia sia capace di farlo. Difficile anche tenere i rubinetti chiusi di fronte a situazioni umanitarie difficili, come quella dei Palestinesi, in cui il dilemma è evidente: i finanziamenti all'Autonomia spesso finiscono a finanziare Hamas, un partito terrorista e genocida al governo, anche se Fatah vorrebbe attuare una politica almeno apparentemente più conciliante. Naturalmente il coordinamento dei servizi e lo scambio di informazioni è un altro momento molto importante della cauterizzazione, perché l'Idra ha anche la capacità di sorgere in molte aree geografiche e di coordinare le sue azioni oltre l'immaginazione. I mezzi di comunicazione, specie l'Internet, sono un grande campo di intervento.

Ma in alcuni casi, nonostante quello che dice Ibrahim, quelli che vengono chiamati, per uscire dalla metafora dell'Idra, targeted killings, servono semplicemente ad evitare che omicidi e attacchi terroristi già programmati o per strada vengano attuati: penso che eliminando i pianificatori o gli esecutori prescelti, ne siano stati evitati non pochi. L'Idra attiva è molto più veloce e precisa di quella che si deve ancora attivare. In questi casi, e potremmo elencarne a decine, si tratta di scelte rispetto alle quali non c'è altra strada che agire. E ci sono anche leader eccellenti la cui sostituzione richiede a volte persino anni di lavorio in cui, così, si salvano molte vite.

Zawahiri invokes the language of social justice

National Review Online

In an unprecedented effort to rally popular support, al Qaeda is apparently trying to refashion its image from an ultra-conservative, radical Islamist group with clear and precise goals — the ultimate being to implementsharia law around the globe — to what the liberal West has long had a soft spot for: a romanticized revolutionary movement of the "Ché" variety, fighting to overthrow oppression and exploitation (which, as the usual story goes, are products of U.S. greed and aggression).

Speaking to the many "under-privileged" of the world in his most recent interview, al Qaeda's Ayman al-Zawahiri declares: "That's why I want blacks in America, people of color, American Indians, Hispanics, and all the weak and oppressed in North and South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world, to know that when we wage jihad in Allah's path, we aren't waging jihad to lift oppression from Muslims only; we are waging jihad to lift oppression from all mankind, because Allah has ordered us never to accept oppression, whatever it may be…This is why I want every oppressed one on the face of the earth to know that our victory over America and the Crusading West — with Allah's permission — is a victory for them, because they shall be freed from the most powerful tyrannical force in the history of mankind."

American blacks, however, are Zawahiri's primary targets. For a traditional Arab Sunni who despises everything borne of the West, Zawahiri spends an inordinate amount of time praising and quoting Malcolm X — who, though a convert to Islam, was still very much a by-product of the U.S. Zawahiri's interview even portrays video-clips of the political activist preaching about freedom and fighting: "Anytime you beg another man to set you free, you will never be free. Freedom is something you have to do for yourself. The price of freedom is death." Also included is a lengthy excerpt where X delineates the differences between "house-negroes" (an epithet Zawahiri later applies to Colin Powell and Condoleezza Rice) and "field-negroes" ("real men" who fight and kill to avenge their honor). Based on this unexpected "African-American" interlude, it is clear whom Zawahiri has in mind for an audience: probably characters like D.C. sniper John Allen Muhammad, who went on a shooting spree randomly murdering Americans shortly after 9/11.

Commenting on the U.S.'s many crimes against nature, Zawahiri next tries to evoke the sentiments of a radically different segment of the world's population: environmentalists. Unlike the former groups, they are generally white and affluent. "[The U.S.] went out and ruined for the entire world, the atmosphere and climate with the gases emitted by its factories," says Zawahiri. Indeed, years ago Osama bin Laden himself used this tactic when complaining about the U.S.' failure to sign the Kyoto protocols: "You [the U.S.] have destroyed nature with your industrial waste and gases more than any other nation in history." (As if al Qaeda, which has little regard for life or limb, could truly care about the environment.)

At any rate, what does this ostensibly disparate group of people — third worlders, environmentalists, and disaffected American blacks — have in common? They all harbor "leftist" sentiments that can be easily exploited and turned against the U.S,, which is precisely what al Qaeda is trying to do.

What of Zawahiri's talk of "lifting oppression from all mankind" and al Qaeda's desire to "free" humanity from "the most powerful tyrannical force in the history of mankind"? Is he serious? Actually, yes, he is.

The seeming contradiction stems from the Western notion of "freedom" and "oppression" and radical Islam's different view of those two terms. For radicals in al Qaeda, the dichotomy between "freedom" and "oppression" is wholly founded on whether sharia law is made supreme in the world; that is, whether every single man, woman, and child — both Muslim and non-Muslim — lives under the mandates of Islamic law. If they do, they are considered "free"; if not, as the case is today, the mass of humanity is considered to be "oppressed."

Osama bin Laden himself makes this clear in one of his more arcane documents written for Muslim eyes only: "Muslims and especially the learned amongst them, should spread sharia law to the world — that and nothing else. Not [secular] laws under the 'umbrella of justice, morality, and rights' as understood by the masses. No, the sharia of Islam is the foundation.…For practically everything valued by the immoral West is condemned under sharia law…. As for [the concept of] oppression, the only oppression is to forsake them [Americans] in their infidelities, and not launch a jihad against them till they submit to the faith — as the Prophet did with themAl Qaeda."

Zawahiri is obviously being disingenuous. "Blacks in America, people of color, American Indians, Hispanics, and all the weak and oppressed in North and South America, in Africa and Asia, and all over the world" certainly do not have sharia law in mind whenever Zawahiri sings praises about freedom and the need for the world to unite and lift off the yoke of Western oppression. This is especially the case since sharia law specifies a number of draconian restrictions and double-standards for all those who choose not to convert: second-class dhimmi status for Christians and Jews (in accordance to Koran 9:29); death for polytheists — those whom Zawahiri would otherwise implore for aid in Africa and Asia (in accordance to Koran 9:5).

Contrary to Zawahiri's promise, then, radical Islam's "victory over America and its 'Crusading' allies" would definitely not be a "victory for them," the non-Muslim peoples of the world.