So with the pesky password problem resolved, I managed to open and watch the Ayman al-Zawahiri video. It's a quite interesting video, or "videos" to be more accurate since the production includes two very different segments: one with Zawahiri in an office, with English subtitles, bashing Bush; and one with Zawahiri against a blank background, with no English subtitles, delivering an extended analysis of how the Pope's statements, America's war on terror, various French and other European actions, and Darfur fit together into a coherent and clear Crusader war against Islam.
Part 1: Zawahiri's rap battle with Bush Part 2: Zawahiri addressing Muslims
I take it as significant that the second part of the video is not translated
or subtitled - the message is for other Muslims, not for Americans -
and that Zawahiri adopts simple white robes when addressing other
Muslims. (By the way, counter-terrorism policy readers: what's the deal with that ridiculous cannon in the background of part one? A signal to someone? Doesn't seem random.)
Zawahiri lacks bin Laden's charisma, but at times - as in this video - he can actually his lesser stature to his advantage. The first half of the video kind of reminds me of Eminem's rap battles at the end of 8 Mile, with Zawahiri going directly after Bush's perceived strengths (the war on terror, Iraq) with what is at least meant to be devastating mockery. Zawahiri addresses Bush directly as a peer, by implication elevating bin Laden above Bush's level. His critique of Bush is punctuated with refrains of "Bush, you lying charlatan", "Bush, can you be brave for once in your life", and so forth. The English subtitles mean that when this part of the video is aired on CNN or Fox, the translators can't distort the message.
The first part of the video challenges Bush's record in the war on terror. Zawahiri argues that despite the efforts of America and its "slaves" (Pakistan, Afghanistan, Egypt, Jordan, Yemen, Saudi Arabia and others are named several times), al-Qaeda is very much on the offensive. If Bush is winning, he asks, why are American forces leaving Afghanistan and al-Qaeda and the Taliban recapturing territory? If Bush is winning, "why then are your forces hastily arranging their pullout from Iraq?" (If only.) Look around the world, he asks: are the forces of al-Qaeda "losing and surrendering? Or by the grace of Allah attacking?" He rattles off examples of al-Qaeda "successes", including - rather puzzlingly - a claim that America is suffering losses "on your own soil, every day."
Two important notes here. First, on Iraq, which will probably be misunderstood: when Zawahiri mocks Bush for withdrawing from Iraq, this probably does not mean that he actually wants Bush to withdraw from Iraq - the mockery is no doubt intended to infuriate Bush and goad him into keeping the troops in Iraq, right where al-Qaeda wants them. Those who conclude that Zawahiri's comments mean that we must remain in Iraq to deny al-Qaeda its victory are playing right into his hands. Second, Zawahiri is clearly trying to paint a sweeping portrait (as did bin Laden in January) of al-Qaeda on the march, scoring gains on all fronts. This is more bravado than reality - there's little sign that the increasingly radicalized and angry mainstream Arab and Muslim public is turning to al-Qaeda for leadership or inspiration - but the construction of this narrative of al-Qaeda's relentless ascension should be seen nevertheless as a core of al-Qaeda's current strategy. That, by the way, is also how I read the tape released on the internet last week by Muhajir, the new al-Qaeda leader in Iraq, which claimed a figure for jihadi deaths (6000) significantly higher than any reputable estimate: it's a boast, not a complaint; not a confession of weakness or struggles, but an attempt to magnify the role and importance of al-Qaeda in the Iraqi insurgency. If and when the US does actually withdraw from Iraq, al-Qaeda will no doubt try to claim victory; the American goal should be to deny it that ability, by minimizing al-Qaeda's role in the Iraqi arena rather than exaggerating it and lending credence to its claims.
The video concentrates to an unusual degree on the issue of al-Qaeda prisoners being held and tortured by America "and its slaves" (Egypt, Jordan, and others again). Khaled Shaykh Mohammed figures prominently. On the one hand, Zawahiri mocks the claim that Khaled's capture has hurt al-Qaeda, since its leaders remain free and most of those captured are not significant. On the other hand, he rattles off a list of leaders who have been captured only to say that it doesn't matter, because Bush faces not individuals or an organization "but the Muslim nation." Will you kill or capture the entire Muslim nation, he asks? (The equation of al-Qaeda with "Muslims" is wishful thinking on his part, but again a crucial part of the al-Qaeda narrative which its opponents should be very careful about adopting.) At one point, Zawahiri actually says that freeing al-Qaeda prisoners is an obligation upon the jihad, which could be read as a veiled offer for a prisoner exchange or something (which should be refused, obviously.)
One other final point from the tape. I've been a leading skeptic of the "bin Laden is dead" claim and I still am. But at one point, Zawahiri suddenly goes into what seems a bit of a tangent about death, the upshot of which is that "a man has not died as long as his memory is preserved." While he never mentions bin Laden by name in this regard, this could be read as preparing the ground for bin Laden's death. To me, that actually gives some credence to the idea that bin Laden has been ill, even if he is not dead.
As for the second half of the tape, it reminds me a bit of the bin Laden tape earlier this year in its presentation of a grand narrative of the current era as a Crusader War against Islam, with al-Qaeda in the vanguard of resistance. The shots at the Pope which have received most media attention actually struck me as somewhat pro forma - as with the Danish cartoons, al-Qaeda got to this issue late, after the firestorm had begun to die down. Zawahiri had to name check the PopeStorm, but as I read it this was only one point in the wider "Crusader Wars" narrative. Darfur was far more prominent than I would have expected - it seems like the jihadis really do expect an American intervention in the Sudan, much more than any Americans who care about Darfur do.
I couldn't help notice that the cannon in the first picture is pointing straight at Zawahiri's head.
It's a shame the mic wire he is pulling in the second photo isn't the string that fires the cannon.
Posted by: Ron F | September 30, 2006 at 12:24 PM
I'm admiring the prayer bump
Posted by: Fred | September 30, 2006 at 01:44 PM
That's some pretty swanky executive office furniture. Do all c-level al-Qai'dah guys get the same perks?
Posted by: The Polemicist | September 30, 2006 at 02:18 PM
Never fear, dear Aardvaark. CNN and Fox won't distort the message of this video because they'll never play it. In fact, they'll pretend that this video doesn't exist, or if they do mention it exists, it'll be five seconds in passing between more pressing news of the day such as which actress got a butt job last week or which actor flew into a rage and stuffed a camera up a papparatzi's nose this morning. They'll never actually show it.
In Soviet America, Dear Leader does not need to censor the media. The media tries to guess what Dear Leader wants it to do, and behaves accordingly for mysterious reasons of its own (perhaps because it is owned by the same people who own Dear Leader? Hmm...).
- Badtux the Censorship Penguin
Posted by: BadTux | October 01, 2006 at 01:50 AM
wouldn't that be a Ramadan cannon, ya Ustez?
Posted by: praktike | October 02, 2006 at 12:04 PM
No, prak, it's obviously a top secret hidden message to al-Qaeda cells in New York, Charlotte, and Boise to deploy their carefully concealed "super guns" against their targets. But which targets? I remain perplexed - perhaps the color of the turban was the tipoff? Sounds like *somebody* didn't order his supersecret counterterrorism decoder ring this year.
Posted by: aardvark | October 02, 2006 at 12:47 PM
That's some pretty swanky executive office furniture. Do all c-level al-Qai'dah guys get the same perks?
It really doesn't look like a tribal compound in northern Pakistan, does it? Perhaps Zawahiri's minions got a good deal on executive-style furniture from an office equipment dealer in Peshawar.
Then again, perhaps the background was composited in by As-Sahab's graphic design team and Zawahiri is really standing in front of a blue screen in a grotty tribal fortress. It might just be a side-effect of image compression, but his body has a suspiciously sharp outline.
Posted by: Gag Halfrunt | October 03, 2006 at 09:29 AM