Filed under: Foreign Policy, Intelligence, Islam, Military, National Security, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: Al Qaeda And Affiliates, The Battle for Syria, Weapons of Mass Destruction
Thomas Jocelyn testified yesterday to the House Committee on Homeland Security, about al Qaeda in Syria and the threat that poses to the United States. Al Qaeda affiliates and allied jihadist groups dominate the insurgency in the heart of the Middle East. The Long War Journal published his testimony.
“The situation inside Syria is grim, with a despicable tyrant on one side and a rebellion compromised by al Qaeda and like-minded extremists on the other. In between these two poles are the people who originally rose up against tyranny in search of a better life. As we’ve seen time and again in this long war, Muslims embroiled in violence in faraway lands are often the first line of defense against an ideology and an organization that pose a direct threat to the West.”
We should have no illusions about the nature of the Syrian war. What we are witnessing right now is a conflict that will have ramifications for our security in the West. The fighting in Syria and the terrorist campaign in Iraq are deeply linked, feeding off of one another in a way that increases the violence in both countries and potentially throughout the region. American interests outside of Syria have already been threatened by the war. We saw this late last year when al Qaeda repurposed a cell of Jordanian citizens who had fought in Syria for an attack inside their home country. They reportedly had the U.S. Embassy in their crosshairs and were planning a complex assault involving other targets as well. …
Al Qaeda and its extremist allies have grown much stronger since late 2011. Al Qaeda does not control the entire rebellion, which is made up of a complex set of actors and alliances. However, al Qaeda and its allies dominate a large portion of northern Syria and play a key role in the fighting throughout the rest of the country. These same al Qaeda-affiliated forces have fought alongside Free Syrian Army brigades. There is no clear geographic dividing line between the most extreme fighters and other rebels. For example, al Qaeda’s affiliates played a key role in the fighting in Latakia, an Assad stronghold on the coast, in early August. And within the past week we saw al Qaeda-affiliated fighters lead an attack in Malula, a Christian village not far from Damascus. These are just two examples chosen from many.
Ayman al Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s emir has made the fight for Syria a strategic priority. They are political revolutionaries who are looking to establish an Islamic Emirate in the heart of the Levant. They want a state of their own — as a start. Other al Qaeda groups have joined the fight — the Taliban from Pakistan, Chechens , fighters from South Asia and North Africa, are fighting alongside each other. There is a Syrian Islamic Front that fights alongside al Qaeda. There is a direct connection between the terrorists over there and terrorists over here. Some are being repurposed for operations against the West. And al Qaeda is recruiting Westerners who can be used against their home countries. They are looking for chemical and biological weapons in Syria, and an al Nusrah Front cell has been arrested and found to be in possession of about 2 kilos of sarin gas. Iraqi officials claim to have broken up an al Qaeda cell that was seeking to launch sarin gas attacks in Iraq, Europe and possibly North America.
Do read the whole thing. These people do understand that we are in — a long war — and have been since 9/11. It is civilizational and serious and real, and we must take it seriously.
NOTE: A piece I posted on September 3 was based on an article from the Institute for the Study of War, and based on information from Elizabeth O’Bagy, who was an adviser to John Kerry and supposedly an expert on the situation in Syria. The Institute has discharged her for misrepresenting her credentials, and she is apparently involved as a lobbyist for the Free Syrian Army. So I don’t know if any of what I wrote is true, nor if the map is correct.
Filed under: Foreign Policy, Iran, Islam, Middle East, National Security, Terrorism, The United States | Tags: "The Arab Spring", The Battle for Syria, Threatening South Korea
Kim Jong Un, the young new dynastic dictator now filling his father’s and grandfather’s shoes declared that “Since the United States is about to ignite a nuclear war, we will be exercising our right to pre-emptive nuclear attack” upon the “aggressor” America. And had just set off its most advanced-ever underground nuclear test to get our attention..
In 2007, in a widely read article in Foreign Affairs, Barack Obama said “Throughout the Middle East, we must harness American power to reinvigorate American diplomacy” which “could bring success even when dealing with long-standing adversaries such as Iran and Syria.”He further promised that he would “develop a strong international coalition to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons and eliminate North Korea’s nuclear weapons program.” How? Through “sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy — the kind that the Bush administration has been unable and unwilling to use.”
That’s working out well. It’s like an upside-down world where the movie is running backwards, starting with a Nobel Peace Prize, and then we slowly get less and less safe, and the world gets more and more troubled.
We are apparently moving towards helping the rebels in Syria, and John Kerry has officially changed his mind about Assad. But the question is do we know which rebels are associated with al Qaeda and which are not?
We approved deposing Mubarak in Egypt, and now we have a Muslim Brotherhood radical in charge, and we’re sending him F-16s and monetary aid, for unfathomable reasons, while the dissidents in Egypt can’t get any help. The Arab Spring did not lead to a blooming of peace., but a blooming of continuing rebellions. The “sustained, direct, and aggressive diplomacy” went well. Hillary set records for mileage flown, but the foreign policy miracles that were promised never materialized. America is perceived as weak, and despots are encouraged.
We are undeniably less safe than we were, and if the movie is still running backwards, we’re in trouble.