"Top US general warns of a decentralised al Qaeda 'arc'"

[Humes fork]

From here:

Top US general warns of a decentralised al Qaeda 'arc' running from Pakistan to Nigeria

Chairman of the US Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen Martin Dempsey said on Thursday that while the US and NATO have been successful in suppressing al Qaeda elements in Afghanistan and Pakistan, but the group has adapted and decentralised according to a report by the US Department of Defence.

“But the al Qaeda ideology has adapted and has decentralised,” he said after meeting NATO military leaders in Brussels.

Depmsey warned that instability in the Middle East and North Africa had allowed the al Qaeda to take advantage of it with an “arc” running across the region starting from Pakistan.

“Now you find these groups are spread across an arc that runs roughly from Pakistan across the Arabian Peninsula, across the Middle East and North Africa and all the way down into Nigeria with Boko Haram,” Dempsey said.

CONTINUES

 

[geni]

While the general point is correct (although I'd be rather worried if they've only just figured that out) Boko Haram aren't al Qaeda. In particular they lack al Qaeda's global vision. They are a local islamic insurgancy reacting to what they percive as a threat to their culture coming from southern nigeria. They aren't nice people but they aren't al Qaeda.

 

[rjh01]

If al Qaeda decentralises then that is good news for the US. al Qaeda will no longer be able to train people to a high standard in a central place. It would have to done locally. This may be to a lower standard depending on the local talent. Ditto for everything else that was formally done at a single location. This will allow the US to eliminate each cell one by one.

 

[Orphia Nay]

http://www.wired.com/2011/07/call-off-the-drone-war/

Ground the U.S. drone war in Pakistan. Rethink the idea of spending billions of dollars to pursue al-Qaida. Forget chasing terrorists in Yemen and Somalia, unless the local governments are willing to join in the hunt.

Those aren’t the words of some human rights activist, or some far-left Congressman. They’re from retired admiral and former Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair — the man who was, until recently, nominally in charge of the entire American effort to find, track, and take out terrorists. Now, he’s calling for that campaign to be reconsidered, and possibly even junked.

[...]

The reconsideration of our relationship with these countries is only the start of the overhaul Blair has in mind, however. He noted that the U.S. intelligence and homeland security communities are spending about $80 billion a year, outside of Afghanistan and Pakistan. Yet al-Qaida and its affiliates only have about 4,000 members worldwide. That’s $20 million per terrorist per year, Blair pointed out.

“You think — woah, $20 million. Is that proportionate?” he asked. “So I think we need to relook at the strategy to get the money in the right places.”

Blair mentioned that 17 Americans have been killed on U.S. soil by terrorists since 9/11 — 14 of them in the Ft. Hood massacre. Meanwhile, auto accidents, murders and rapes combine have killed an estimated 1.5 million people in the past decade. “What is it that justifies this amount of money on this narrow problem?” he asked.

 

[Darth Rotor]

This will allow the US to eliminate each cell one by one.

The "easy button" doesn't really exist.

 

[Darat]

If al Qaeda decentralises then that is good news for the US. al Qaeda will no longer be able to train people to a high standard in a central place. It would have to done locally. This may be to a lower standard depending on the local talent. Ditto for everything else that was formally done at a single location. This will allow the US to eliminate each cell one by one.

If? Al qaeda has been nothing but brand for well over a decade, it's akin to the taliban.

 

[Humes fork]

If? Al qaeda has been nothing but brand for well over a decade, it's akin to the taliban.

Are the Taliban really a brand though? Could be wrong, but I don't think any group outisde of Afghanistan or Pakistan calls themselves "Taliban".

 

[atecom]

While the general point is correct (although I'd be rather worried if they've only just figured that out) Boko Haram aren't al Qaeda. In particular they lack al Qaeda's global vision. They are a local islamic insurgancy reacting to what they percive as a threat to their culture coming from southern nigeria. They aren't nice people but they aren't al Qaeda.

Boko Haram, Al Shabaab and Jemaah Islamiah are all Al Qaeda affiliates. They may not be able to pull of the large scale attacks against the US that Al Qaeda once were able to do, but the spread of the influence of Al Qaeda is definitely a concern. Much of Western Africa, Eastern Africa the Middle East, and even places in South East Asia such as Indonesia and the Philippines now have a significant influence from Al Qaeda.

Any one of these groups could eventually gain the resources needed proceed from regional irritations to global threats. Solutions are hard to come by any action by the west can be used as recruitment propaganda by these people. Al Qaeda's legacy is very well alive. Luckily for the west, it doesn't much affect them for now, but that may not last forever.

 

[rjh01]

The "easy button" doesn't really exist.

I never said it would be easy. Especially when they make it hard for themselves.

 

[geni]

Boko Haram, Al Shabaab and Jemaah Islamiah are all Al Qaeda affiliates. They may not be able to pull of the large scale attacks against the US that Al Qaeda once were able to do, but the spread of the influence of Al Qaeda is definitely a concern.

The problem with that line of argument is that they don't for the most part appear to be even interested in attacks on the US or other western players. When British citizens went over to join Al Shabaab rather than sending them back with some information on bomb building Al Shabaab expended them trying to archive local objectives. For Al Shabaab any Al-Qaeda branding is a recruitment mechanism not an indication of their goals.

Boko Haram don't even appear to be interested in global recruitment. Their thinking is purely domestic as is to be expected.

Jemaah Islamiah on the other hand are more Al-Qaeda like in their thinking.

 

[Garrette]

The problem with that line of argument is that they don't for the most part appear to be even interested in attacks on the US or other western players. When British citizens went over to join Al Shabaab rather than sending them back with some information on bomb building Al Shabaab expended them trying to archive local objectives. For Al Shabaab any Al-Qaeda branding is a recruitment mechanism not an indication of their goals.

Boko Haram don't even appear to be interested in global recruitment. Their thinking is purely domestic as is to be expected.

Jemaah Islamiah on the other hand are more Al-Qaeda like in their thinking.

This.

 

[Beerina]

If? Al qaeda has been nothing but brand for well over a decade, it's akin to the taliban.