On the latest video address by Dr Zawahiri, the "Prime Minister" of Jihadism..

By Walid Phares

In its latest video, As Sahhab TV production featured “Prime Minister” Dr Ayman Zawahiri addressing the Umma on matters of Jihad and aqida (doctrine). Or at least this was the image the sophisticated field-studio wanted to project to the viewers. A very relax chief executive of al Qaeda, reviewing the various files on the “Caliphate agenda” of the month, responding to the infidel world leaders and providing an update of the various battlefields around the globe. “He seems very relax, in some cave-castle, said Druze leader Walid Jumblat on al Jazeera few weeks ago when asked about the al Qaeda leader. Indeed, for someone on the run, he looked well seated and secure, even though one technical mistake could change that whole situation. The setting is not the essence of the video tape released today to the Salafis web site, but still, it is part of the whole package delivered to the “customers” on many continents. In this tape, it is very likely that the “Prime Minister of Jihadism” was reading from a type of a teleprompter system, indicating that he was operating from or sitting in a "professionally equipped" studio, at least for the first part of the taping, although some experts believe that the background can be created by online techniques. Intriguingly, and just for curiosity, there was that cricket chirping captured by the audio. However, it wasn’t clear why Dr Zawahiri was taped in another setting to deliver the second part of his “state of the Jihad address.”? It looked as a "quasi" outdoor setting but during a thunder storm. In that setting too, Dr Ayman was “reading” from a "quasi" teleprompter. But these aren't the beef of the matter. We’ll leave these technical questions to the specialists: Now, to the content.

For Hizballah, Post-War Politics are Local

By David Schenker

Hizballah Secretary General Hassan Nasrallah’s coming out (of hiding) rally on September 22 made big headlines. Most of the attention in the West was focused on Nasrallah’s revelation that Hizballah still possessed some 20,000 rockets and missiles. But a closer reading of the speech highlights other equally troubling developments on the Hizballah front. Primary among these developments is Hizballah’s new focus on domestic issues. Nasrallah’s speech highlights Hizballah’s strategy for coping with the expanded UNIFIL and LAF presence in the South. This development poses new challenges for Washington and the moderate government of Lebanese PM Fouad Siniora.

I wrote an article on this the Weekly Standard Online (The Daily Standard). It’s called Hezbollah's New Mission:
The "resistance" takes aim at the Lebanese government.

New Video Released With Al Qaeda #2 Ayman al-Zawahiri

By Andrew Cochran

The new video, promised earlier this week, is out, in which Zawahiri attacks Pope Benedict XVI and President Bush a "lying failure" and "deceitful charlatan." You can see it thanks to Laura Mansfield. Rita Katz of SITE Institute has a one-minute clip for non-subscribers, the picture below, and this analysis: "As-Sahab, al-Qaeda’s multimedia production arm, issued today, Friday, September 29, 2006, a 17:51 minute video speech featuring Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri and titled: “Bush, the Pope of the Vatican, Darfur, and the Crusader Wars”. He appears in two scenes: one, subtitled in English, with an office-setup background with a lamp, flag bearing “No God, but Allah”, and a cannon; the other is without a background, and depicts Zawahiri dressed entirely in white, without subtitles. To U.S. President George W. Bush, Zawahiri questions: “why don't you tell them how many million citizens of America and it's allies you intend to kill in search of the imaginary victory and in breathless pursuit of the mirage towards which you are driving your people’s sons in order to increase your profits?” He also addresses the capture of Khalid Shaikh Muhammad and questions that if it helped in the "war on terror" then “why are your troops retreating in secrete from the south and east of Afghanistan?... Bush...be aware that the liberation of our captives is a debt on our shoulders which we must fulfill”."

Zawahiri also names other important captured Al Qaeda leaders: "You’ve captured Ramzi Yousef, Umar Abd al-Rahman, Wali Khan, Ibn al-Shayhk, Ramzi bin al-Shibh, Khalid al-Shaykh, Abu al-Faraj al-Libi..." This finishes a busy month of September for Al Qaeda central, which began with the Zawahiri video with American Adam Gadahn, then two 9/11-related videos, one with Zawahiri and another video with clips of Osama Bin Laden.

Picture courtesy of SITE Institute:

Hugo: Gunning for Africa

By Aaron Mannes

I recently posted about the regional danger posed by the new Venezuelan license to produce Kalashnikov assault rifles. However, I underestimated the Venezuelan Colonel. I was worried about the region, but Venezuela's President has even wider ambitions. A leading Caracas daily, El Universal reports:

President Hugo Chávez warned that "as long as imperialism exists and threatens to annihilate entire peoples and impose their views, we have to open up our plant to manufacture rifles, buy (Russian-made) Sukhoi warplanes and other military equipment."

At the closing ceremony of the first meeting of Venezuelan and Russian businesspeople, in the Presidential Palace of Miraflores, Caracas, Chávez stressed that bilateral technical military cooperation is moving forward at a steady pace.

"We have received messages from Latin American, Caribbean and even African countries asking about the production capacity of our rifle manufacturing plant. My dear Russian friends, I am sure you will agree, this is a platform for integration in other fields."

Chávez once again insisted that his US counterpart George W. Bush "smells sulfur. Nobody should have doubts about it."

Africa has long been a play ground for dictators with global ambitions such as Libya's Gaddhafi. Latin America may not be a big enough stage for Chavez. Africa has been among the stops on Hugo's peregrinations and in July he called upon African leaders to collaborate with Venezuela in resisting American hegemony and better leveraging their natural resources. In particular he urged African leaders to increase the taxes they charge on oil companies.

This is typcial of Chavez's populist cant. However, disseminating guns in Africa is a serious matter. Africa has suffered terribly from civil strife for decades and the infusion of more firearms will only expand that continent's misery.

There are also implications for the international terrorist-criminal nexus - already strong in Latin America and Africa. Africa is a well-established trans-shipment point for Latin American drugs. Hezbollah is well-established in West Africa and is particularly strong in the illicit diamond trade. Considering the warm relations between their respective patrons - assuming FARC-Hezbollah collaboration in Africa is no leap of imagination.

As a matter of high policy, Hugo is attempting to curry favor among African states to back his bid for a UN Security Council Seat, raise oil prices, and fulfill his vision of a multi-polar world. Cheap oil and cash are one set of incentives - cheap firearms with no strings attached are another. However, with its weak states, insecure borders, and poverty Africa is an appealing base for terrorism and transnational crime. These networks could be useful to Hugo's ambitions, not only within Africa, but as a conduit for distributing weapons, cash, and influence worldwide.

Finally, I would be remiss in writing on this if I did not mention my Douglas Farah who is a leading expert on trans-national crime and terrorism in Africa and has done a great deal of excellent writing on these topics in this blog.

Cross-Posted to the TerrorBlog.

Some Reasons Tariq Ramadan Was Denied A Visa

By Douglas Farah

There has been some outcry and dismay over the U.S. government decision to deny a visa to Tariq Ramadan, one of the new generation of leaders of the international Muslim Brotherhood, who has achieved near superstar status among Muslims in Europe.

While consistently presenting a moderate face of Islam in public, his ties to more radical groups are several. As is usual in these cases, there is no smoking gun, but the persisent nature of the contacts and references to him by those engaged in Islamist violence gives rightful pause to those deciding on visas.

Earlier this month Jean-Charles Brisard first revealed the following Ramadan ties. to the less than moderate elements of Islamist structure. European intelligence sources had privaely told me of the contents of the Swiss report on Ramadan's arrangement of a 1991 meeting with Zawahiri and the "Blind Sheikh," Omar Abdel Rahman. Since the information is already in the public domain, I am reprinting some of the ties outlined by JCB, from his blog, that may be useful in understanding the decision even if one does not agree with it. My full blog is here.

It takes two to tango. Why the coup in Thailand may not lead to an improvement in the insurgency

By Zachary Abuza

One of the justifications for the Thai coup was Thaksin’s mishandling of the Southern insurgency, which has claimed some 1,700 lives in the past two-an-a-half years. The general chafed at the political interference of Thaksin and his deputy Chidchai, their rotations of generals, failed policies, and blatant dismissal of the National Reconciliation Council’s findings. People looked to General Sonthi, himself a Muslim, to solve the insurgency. With Sonthi there should be three steps to improving a dismal situation:

First, there will be more consistency in personnel and policies. Counter-insurgency takes time and will not be resolved when leaders are constantly shuffled.

Second, Sonthi will implement many of the findings of the National Reconciliation Commission. While they alone will not quell the insurgency, they will go a long way in improving relations with the restive Muslim majority in Thailand’s deep south. The Muslims severely mistrust the government, and without improved cooperation, human intelligence will remain abysmally poor.

Third, Sonthi has announced that he is willing to negotiate with insurgents. The problem here is that there is no one to negotiate with. Warring sides only negotiate only when there is nothing else to be gained by fighting. That is clearly not the case with the insurgents. There have been no meaningful arrests, their network is in tact, their technical proficiency and experience are improving by the day, they can attack at will, and the government’s policies continue to alienate the population. They have nothing to gain from negotiation. Only the old, exiled leaders of PULO, living abroad in Europe have expressed any interest in negotiating, though they control none of the insurgents. Offers to negotiate are simply leverage their exceptionally weak hand.

The empirical evidence bears this out. Though there were no attacks in the first two days after the coup, right now they are launching attacks at their pre-coup rate (which were some of the highest in the course of the insurgency). A review of some of the larger attacks in the week since 23 September:

• Four police were wounded in a bombing in Pattani
• A bomb placed in a Buddhist temple in Yala killed a soldier on guard
• A 10kg roadside IED in Narathiwat killed three including one soldier and severely wounded five others.
• In separate attacks, gunmen killed three in Yala and one in Pattani
• In one shooting, a 10Kg bomb was left, and set to go off when police came to investigate, though it was defused

In post-coup Bangkok, everyone expects changes in government policy towards the insurgency; and in that vain, assumed that it will lead to changes in the insurgent’s tactics and operations. What if in their analysis, nothing has changed: one set of elites has simply replaced another set of elites? And with everything going their way in the insurgency, what do they have to gain by stopping and negotiating?

In other news, the US government announced that they had imposed sanctions on the Council on Democratic Reform that will impact some $24 million in security and counter-terrorism assistance to Thailand. Thailand is a major non-Nato ally and diplomatic partner. It has played an important role in the US "war on terror" following the 11 September 2001 attacks, including the capture of Hambali in August 2003 and serving beriefly as a "black site" for the interrogation of some highlevel al Qaeda detainees.

A Patient Enemy: On 9/11 America entered a war that the Terrorists had already begun

By Walid Phares

(Text of an essay-assessment at the fifth anniversary of September 11)

As we have marked the fifth anniversary of the 9/11 attacks on America, and we review the half a decade of war on terror since, the central question that comes to the minds of both experts and policymakers is this – who is winning the war and where are we in its prosecution? And to refine, is al Qaeda on the retreat, is Afghanistan working, is Iraq surviving the challenge, and is Lebanon’s Cedars Revolution on the rise or has it been defeated? Is Hezbollah’s war changing the U.S. strategy regarding Iran and Israel? And finally, is the U.S. homeland secure, or is it penetrated and threatened?

All of these are issues of great importance to Americans, Westerners and societies determined to struggle for democracy and freedom. For even though 9/11 was a benchmark in the history of the U.S., it also became a rallying date in the eyes of the Jihadists for more lethal future attacks, not just in America, but also in Europe, India, Africa and other parts of the world that have tasted the wrath of terror since 2001.

The widening of the war on terrorism and the multiplication of its battlefields has critics claiming Americans have been led in the wrong direction, and that the decision to fight the terrorists on their ground was erroneous. Are the critics right? Or are they wrong? Five years after the attacks which sparked this long war, a proper review is in order – a review not only of the enemy we face, but of the war we are engaged in and what the future holds in this regard.

Al-Qaeda Iraq Leader Calls For Kidnapping, Bio/Rad Weapon Attacks on US Bases in Iraq

By Jeffrey Imm

Update to previous blog: Al-Qaeda's Iraq leader issued a message today calling for kidnapping of Christians during Ramadan and for scientists to join the Jihadists in using radioactive or biological weapons against USA bases in Iraq. (Audio can be downloaded here.)

Al-Qaeda Leader in Iraq Abu Hamza al-Muhajir (aka Abu Ayyub al-Masri) issued a 20-minute long audio message today "Come to a Word that is Just Between Us and You," which is taken from the Qur'an, Surah al-Imran, verse 64 that was posted on Jihadist web sites by the Mujahadeen Council, an umbrella group of eight Iraqi armed Salafite formations, including al-Qaeda in Iraq.

The message is dated from the first day of Ramadan (September 23) and calls for kidnapping of Christians: "I call on every holy fighter in Iraq to strive during this holy month (Ramadan)... to capture some dogs of the Christians so that we can liberate our imprisoned sheikh" referring to sheikh Omar Abdul Rahman. Omar Abdul Ramhan has been in prison in the US since 1995 for the attack two years earlier on World Trade Center.

The audio message also called for experts in "chemistry, physics, electronics, media and all other sciences -- especially nuclear scientists and explosives experts" to join the Jihadists. "We are in dire need of you," he said. "The field of jihad (holy war) can satisfy your scientific ambitions, and the large American bases (in Iraq) are good places to test your unconventional weapons, whether biological or dirty, as they call them."

The audio message also claimed that "The blood has been spilled in Iraq of more than 4,000 foreigners who came to fight" in Iraq.

Cross-Border Raids into Afghanistan Accelerate

By Daveed Gartenstein-Ross

I have previously written about Pakistan's dangerous peace treaty with factions sympathetic to al-Qaeda and the Taliban. My most comprehensive treatment of this issue is the article that I co-authored with Bill Roggio in the most recent edition of the Weekly Standard, "Pakistan Surrenders." However, the dangers of this agreement aren't universally recognized -- at least not at an official level. When presented with Pakistani president Pervez Musharraf's claim that this was somehow an anti-Taliban deal, President Bush replied, "I believe him." And assistant secretary of state Richard Boucher has claimed that the peace treaty "really has the potential to work," and that it gives Pakistan a chance "to get a political handle on this and enlist its citizens in the fight against terror."

Theories about this agreement are one thing, but it's hard to deny what is actually happening on the ground. To that extent, there is an important new report from the Associated Press:

A U.S. military official said Wednesday that American troops on Afghanistan's eastern border have seen a threefold increase in attacks since a recent truce between Pakistani troops and pro-Taliban tribesmen that was supposed to have stopped cross-border raids by the militants. The peace agreement, which followed a June 25 cease-fire, also has contributed to the Taliban's resurgence, the U.S. official said, requesting anonymity because of the sensitivity of the issue. Since the truce, ethnic Pashtun rebels are no longer fighting Pakistani troops but are using the North Waziristan border region as a control hub for launching attacks in Afghanistan, the official told The Associated Press.

This gives lie to the claim that the agreement will actually decrease cross-border incursions. The reports from the ground indicate that the opposite is true; they also indicate that Taliban-style religious law is being imposed in the tribal areas. If you want to understand the effect of the Waziristan Accord, don't look to the politicians for answers.

New Audio from Leader of Al Qaeda in Iraq (updated)

By Andrew Cochran

New audio tape from Abu Hamza al-Muhajir - Laura Mansfield has the original tape here. Rita Katz of the SITE Institute has an analysis: "The speech, 20:31 in length, is titled: “Come to a Word that is Just Between Us and You,” which is taken from the Qur’an, Surah al-Imran, verse 64. On the occasion of the month of Ramadan, al-Muhajir calls upon every “free Mujahid” to come to Iraq and engage in jihad, which the emir hopes to increase in ferocity. He states: “It pleases me at the end of my speech to announce the beginning of a great militaristic campaign by the name of the clear conquest, by it we will eradicate the limb of the infidel and the apostate”. In the middle of the speech, Abu Hamza al-Muhajir reminds of the “Blind Sheikh,” Omar Abdul Rahman, and encourages the Mujahideen to capture some of the “Roman dogs” so as to secure his release from the “darkness of his prison, gratitude, loyalty and love.” He then calls upon the sheikhs of the Sunni tribes in Iraq to not slacken in their support for the Mujahideen and thanks them for their public stance, finance and men."

Al Qaeda has lost a number of key operatives recently and is under attack by a group of Sunni leaders, so this could be a pep talk to his forces. It could also be timed to coincide with the next tape from Al Qaeda #2 Ayman al-Zawahiri (UPDATE: That release appears imminent as of noon ET).

MERC, MERC, MERC

By Zachary Abuza

Today, Australia’s Commonwealth Bank denied that it had funded the Southeast Asian affiliate of Al Qaeda, Jemaah Islamiyah, through its dealings with the Indonesian NGO, the Medical Emergency Relief Charity (MERC). Yesterday, The Australian Financial Review reported that MERC was soliciting donations through its account at the bank’s Jakarta branch. MERC is neither on the UN Security Council’s 1267 Committee list nor on the US Government’s SDN list as per Executive Order 13224, but it has a long history of working along side various organs of Jemaah Islamiyah.

The Medical Emergency Relief Charity (MERC) was established on 14 August 1999 as a result of sectarian fighting in Indonesia’s outer islands, much of which was being led and perpetrated by two paramilitaries, the Laskar Mujihidin and the Laskar Jundullah, run by JI leaders, Mohamad Iqbal Abdurrahman (Abu Jibril) and Agus Dwikarna, respectively. From late 1998 until 2001, some 6-9,000 people died in these conflicts.

While MERC members were not implicated in directly supporting Laskar Jundullah and Laskar Mujihidin paramilitary operations in the Malukus and Central Sulawesi, to the degree that another Indonesian charity KOMPAK was, its one-sided approach to the Malukus conflict, as well as the actions of some individual members raised suspicions. We don’t have firm evidence or a paper trail linking MERC to JI, but the circumstantial evidence is not insignificant.

In 2000-2001, MERC produced two well-publicized videos for fund-raising purposes: “Pasir Hitum Teluk Galela” (“The Black Sand of Galela Bay”) and “Dan Kesaksian Pun Menangis” (“And the Witnessing Despite the Crying”). Both are available from the MERC website: http://www.MERC.org/vcd_01.htm. Like other Jihadi videos produced by KOMPAK and Reda Seyam, an Egyptian-German film-maker for Al Qaeda, these are horrifically graphic and biased, portraying only Muslims as victims of the bloodletting. MERC’s videos do differ in one important way however, they do not explicitly support violence. The jihadi videos from Southeast Asia tend to be very formulaic: the first two thirds Muslims are being slaughtered, mosques are being desecrated, Kaffirs are running amok, and the state security forces are doing nothing to defend the Muslim community, thereby justifying Islamic vigilantism. The final third often shows poorly armed Muslims fighting back. The message is clear: join or support the cause so that these brave Mujihidin can defend themselves. The MERC videos don’t have that final third. Instead they show open air triage and surgery. Gory, to be sure, but not explicitly advocating violence.

I have some evidence that MERC received funding from the Indonesian branch of the Saudi charity the International Islamic Relief Organization (IIRO), which was, along with the Philippine branch, designated by the US Treasury Department under Executive Order 13224 and by the UN 1267 Committee on 3 August 2006. The IIRO funded also funded KOMPAK, a charity explicitly tied to JI and sectarian militancy. KOMPAK and the Indonesian office of Al Haramain were headed by Aris Munandar, a senior JI leader, now on the lamb. Munandar was put on the 13224 and 1267 listings on 5 September 2003. Designated at the same time was Agus Dwikarna who ran the KOMPAK and al Haramain offices in Sulawesi, in addition to JI’s paramilitary force. Both Munandar and KOMPAK had some dealings with MERC.

MERC now has 12 offices in Indonesia, concentrated in the regions most directly affected by sectarian violence (Sulawesi, Malukus and Kelimantan). MERC was very active in relief efforts in Aceh following the 26 December 2004 tsunami that killed some 165,000 Indonesians. According to a separate English language website, MERC established for Acehnese relief efforts, they have used donations to buy medicine and basic foodstuffs as well as rent tractors and bulldozers to clear rubble and vehicles to distribute food. They have dispatched “mobile polyclinics” staffed by some 50 doctors. MERC’s goal was to quickly raise some Rp700,000,000 to establish an emergency field hospital in Meulaboh. In Aceh, it was working alongside with Jibril’s Laskar Mujihidin and Abu Bakar Ba’asyir’s Majelis Mujiheddin Indonesia.

MERC’s operations abroad, in particular in Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, have also raised some concerns about it being a conduit for terrorist funding. Indeed the MERC website previously stated that they operate in the tribal areas of Pakistan with the support and permission of the Taliban.

MERC clearly has an Islamist and virulently anti-Western agenda. There is no crime in that. Its relationship with the IIRO, KOMPAK and JI-affiliated organizations is greater cause for concern. The Indonesian authorities have a responsibility to fully investigate MERC’s financial dealings with the IIRO and Al Haramain, both of whose Indonesian branches were proscribed by the US and UN as terrorist financiers. The Commonwealth Bank should probably do a better job in knowing its customer. If nothing else, it would be a prudent commercial decision, knowing the raw emotional feelings of the Australian public towards anything that remotely comes close to Jemaah Islamiyah.

Terrorism Defense Attorney Runs Off At Mouth, Loses to Expert

By Andrew Cochran

Another set of terrorism defense attorneys tried to disqualify Evan Kohlmann as an expert witness in his client's trial and met the same fate as their peers in other trials, failing miserably. In the meantime, one terrorism defense attorney from another case grossly misrepresented Evan's stellar credentials and thereby also insulted a number of federal judges who have certified Evan's expert qualifications.

Evan was asked to testify in the Albany, NY case of two Muslim men charged with conspiring to launder $50,000 from the sale of a shoulder-fired missile in an FBI sting focused on plans to assassinate Pakistan's U.N. ambassador in New York. The defense attorneys filed a motion to disqualify Evan, which led a reporter covering a case to ask Marvin Miller, one of the defense attorneys in the multi-defendant "Virginia jihad" case, about Evan. Miller aimed his best verbal volley at Evan and, indirectly, every federal judge before whom Evan has testifed: "He is young. He doesn't have experience. He's never done any original research... He runs off at the mouth and a lot of judges won't control him the way they will other witnesses."

If you follow terrorism trials, you'll understand why Mr. Miller is a little hyper-sensitiive about Evan. In the "Virginia jihad" case of Ali Chandia this year - the one in which Mr. Miller lost, with his client going to jail - the government presented a 12-page document opposing Miller's motion to exclude Evan, and the judge agreed with the government.

Naturally, the judge in the Albany case gave short shrift to the motion to exclude, and Evan testified on Wednesday on the defendants' ties to the Islamic Movement of Kurdistan (IMK) and Pakistan-based Jaish-e-Mohammed. I say "naturally" because every single judge who has reviewed Evan's credentials has found him qualified as an expert witness. Other terrorism-centered cases in which he has testified include the Paracha case involving aid to Al Qaeda, the Ali al-Timimi case associated with the "Virginia jihad" cases, the Jose Padilla case in Florida, and cases in Bosnia and the UK. In the al-Timimi case, Judge Brinkema announced, ""(T)his court has watched him testify and he is in my view well qualified to testify."

Mr. Miller should stop slandering expert witnesses in the press. I doubt he will win many points from the judges who keep certifying Evan as an expert.

Some Thoughts on the NIE

By Douglas Farah

Admittedly, we have only a few declassified pages of the National Intelligence Estimate, so there are clearly issues that remain classified, and some of these might be addressed there.

But it is striking that the "Trends in Global Terrorism: Implications for the United States" does not discuss financial issues at all. Nor does it discuss the role in radicalization provided by the massive flow of Saudi and Arab Peninsula dollars into radicalization efforts.

It is this fundamental base of Salafist teachings that allow for the spread of radical, decentralized Islamist network described in the findings. There is a basic playbook being taught around the world, with funding by governments that claim to be allies in fighting jihadist movements. With the teachings from early childhood, coupled with corrupted teachings on the Koran spread at Wahhabi mosques around the world, a global community is built.

The lack of recognition of the "pull" factors in Islamist radicalization is surprising. My entire blog is here.

DNI Releases Declassified "Key Judgments" of National Intelligence Estimate (available here)

By Andrew Cochran

Under orders from President Bush, the Director of National Intelligence has released an declassified version of the key judgments from the April NIE, from which one conclusion was leaked to and reported by the "New York Times."

Here is the declassified section titled "Key Judgments" released today (Acrobat file, four pages only). A few key quotes:

"United States-led counterterrorism efforts have seriously damaged the leadership of al-Qa’ida and disrupted its operations; however, we judge that al-Qa’ida will continue to pose the greatest threat to the Homeland and US interests abroad by a single terrorist organization. We also assess that the global jihadist movement—which includes al- Qa’ida, affiliated and independent terrorist groups, and emerging networks and cells—is spreading and adapting to counterterrorism efforts.

• Although we cannot measure the extent of the spread with precision, a large body of all-source reporting indicates that activists identifying themselves as jihadists, although a small percentage of Muslims, are increasing in both number and geographic dispersion.
• If this trend continues, threats to US interests at home and abroad will become more diverse, leading to increasing attacks worldwide.
• Greater pluralism and more responsive political systems in Muslim majority nations would alleviate some of the grievances jihadists exploit. Over time, such progress, together with sustained, multifaceted programs targeting the vulnerabilities of the jihadist movement and continued pressure on al-Qa’ida, could erode support for the jihadists.

We assess that the global jihadist movement is decentralized, lacks a coherent global strategy, and is becoming more diffuse. New jihadist networks and cells, with anti- American agendas, are increasingly likely to emerge. The confluence of shared purpose and dispersed actors will make it harder to find and undermine jihadist groups.

• We assess that the operational threat from self-radicalized cells will grow in importance to US counterterrorism efforts, particularly abroad but also in the Homeland.
• The jihadists regard Europe as an important venue for attacking Western interests. Extremist networks inside the extensive Muslim diasporas in Europe facilitate recruitment and staging for urban attacks, as illustrated by the 2004 Madrid and 2005 London bombings.

Sami Al-Arian: A Valuable Witness?

By The Investigative Project on Terrorism (IPT)

Today’s St. Petersburg Times reports that convicted Palestinian Islamic Jihad operative, Sami Al-Arian, has been brought to Northern Virginia to possibly testify before a grand jury investigating an area Islamic think tank, presumably, according to the St. Pete Times, the International Institute of Islamic Thought (IIIT). The article states that Al-Arian’s ex-lawyer claims this move is “a ploy to further punish Al-Arian, who will likely not testify and will be held in contempt,” but a look at al-Arian’s Palestinian Islamic Jihad affiliated organizations in Tampa reveals a long standing financial and ideological history that he has had with IIIT, thus making him an obvious valuable witness.

Ramadan Abdullah Shallah, Secretary General of the Palestinian Islamic Jihad since the mid 90’s, was brought in by Al-Arian a few years earlier to be a director of Al-Arian’s Tampa-based think tank, the World and Islam Studies Enterprise (WISE). In 1991, the University of South Florida (affiliated with WISE at the time) asked WISE to provide an account of their funding sources. Ramadan Abdullah (Shallah) wrote in response that their “largest contributor is the Washington-based Islamic Institute for International Thought (IIIT).”

What the FBI Needs Now

By Andrew Cochran

Editor's Note: This is a guest post by Michael R. Fedarcyk, who recently retired from the FBI after 24 years of service. His last assignment was as the Special Assistant to the FBI's Deputy Director, where he was responsible for strategic planning and resource allocation. He is currently employed as Director, Intelligence Sector, at BearingPoint Consulting. The views and assertions in this post are Mr. Fedarcyk's.

It has been said that policy without resources is rhetoric. Five years removed from the worst terrorist incident on American soil, it is appropriate to ask whether improvements to our national security posture are rhetoric or real. As the former head of the FBI’s strategic planning office, I know the FBI is committed to real change by aligning its limited resources consistent with its national security priorities through a threat-based planning strategy. However, given the emergence of the terrorist homegrown threat, the additional national security responsibilities placed upon the FBI by Congress and the Office of the National Director of Intelligence (ODNI) and the impact of the shift in the management structure at FBI Headquarters, the question is whether the FBI has the necessary resources, personnel and funds, to address its national security responsibilities while maintaining its outstanding law enforcement capabilities.

Countering terrorism has become more difficult and now requires a broader investigative strategy because of changes in the nature and sources of the threat. Al-Qaeda, for example, has morphed from a loosely directed organization into an ideological movement which requires no membership but rather a common goal to direct violence against the United States. The FBI must adapt its highly successful enterprise-based investigative strategy designed to target the organization into a strategy which counters an ideological movement that lacks visible leadership, organizational structure, and sources of material support but is nonetheless self-motivated, extremely resourceful and equally dangerous. The impact of the homegrown terrorist threat for the FBI requires an increasing dedication of valuable, limited Agent and analytical resources to a much broader-based, resource-intensive investigative strategy of “casting nets” in order to successfully interdict the homegrown terrorists before they can carry out their acts of violence.

A classic example of the homegrown threat dilemma for the FBI can be found in the recent arrests in Miami of individuals who were planning acts of violence. While the arrests were characterized by FBI Deputy Director, John S. Pistole, as “more aspirational than operational” others in the media labeled the group, after the fact, as “the gang that couldn’t shoot straight” and derided the threat. The FBI (and the American public) can ill afford anything less than a zero tolerance when it comes to terrorism. Timely preemption, utilizing all the available means, is the most effective response to the homegrown threat albeit a costly one.

Comments on the death of Umar Faruq

By Kenneth Conboy

Indonesian security officials privately welcomed news that Umar Faruq had been killed in Iraq on 25 September, as there has been a lingering concern the al-Qaeda terrorist might attempt to return to Southeast Asia after his July 2005 escape from an Afghan prison. Some comments on Faruq:

* After his June 2002 capture in Indonesia, Faruq proved to be one of the most prolific sources of information regarding foreign extremists in Southeast Asia. As was the case with Hambali, he began talking almost immediately after his arrest, and went on to provide details of his activities during questioning that lasted for more than a year. Faruq apparently did not need to be coerced into talking; he was reportedly proud of his role in extremist activities.

* Faruq was questioned by Indonesian police investigators in 2003 in order to obtain information for the trial of militant Indonesian cleric Abu Bakar Ba'asyir. In order to abide by Indonesian law, Faruq's testimony would only be valid in court if it was given on Indonesian territory. The Indonesians reportedly came up with a pragmatic solution: an Indonesian flag was unfurled and Faruq's cell temporarily was declared Indonesian soil. In the end, his comments were of little value: Faruq had only a couple of fleeting encounters with the cleric, and most of his information about Ba'asyir was hearsay.

* Indonesians are often game for a good conspiracy, and after Faruq escaped from an Afghan prison in July 2005, rumors circulated that he had actually been doubled by U.S. authorities and released on a mission to infiltrate al-Qaeda cells elsewhere in Afghanistan. These rumors would now appear laid to rest.

* It has long been suspected that Faruq, who was born of Iraqi parents, would attempt to join the insurgency in Iraq. This speculation was supported by reports in recent months that his Indonesian wife had been receiving frequent cell phone calls from unidentified persons in Iraq. It is not known if these calls played a role in tracing his whereabouts.

Col. Chavez: Send Money, Guns and Doctors

By Aaron Mannes

When the outgoing Southcom chief General Bantz Craddock called Venezuela's President, Hugo Chavez, "bigger than a nuisance," he was vastly understating the problem. Chavez is a major overlooked danger on the international stage. He is by no means the most murderous figure on the world scene, nor does he have a nuke. But he does have the potential to turn back the clock for Latin America, with disastrous results both for the region and world.

Over the last few decades Latin America has made important strides in constructing democratic governments that promote liberty. The region is by no means done, much of this progress has been of the frustrating two steps forward, one step back variety - and the region remains impoverished. Nonetheless, it is difficult to ignore the predominance of democratic institutions throughout Latin America.

However, important social and economic faultlines still exist throughout Latin America and Chavez - with his oil wealth - is well positioned to exploit them and extend his own radicalism throughout the region.

Chavez's financial support has been key to supporting extremist allies from Argentina to Cuba and everywhere in between. Venezuela has received thousands of Cuban doctors, sports trainers, and other operatives. When Bolivia, under new President Evo Morales, allied with Venezuela and Cuba, Boliva too began receiving Cuban doctors. No doubt some of these programs do some good (they are also a safety valve for Castro - doctors use the trip to Venezuela or Bolivia to slip Castro's grasp.) However, it appears the Cuban agents are mostly organizing citizen militias that Chavez and Morales can rely on in a civil conflict.

But the biggest worry is the guns. Over the summer Hugo went on an arms buying spree in which he purchased high-performance jets and helicopters (not terribly useful for a nation with no real enemies) and 100,000 Kalashnikov assault rifles. Chavez also obtained a license so he could manufacture his own assault rifles. The first client for these weapons will probably be Chavez's own Bolivarian Circles (his citizen militia) and the second will be the FARC. But beyond that there are numerous latent, and not so latent, conflicts that could erupt throughout the region. In Peru, defeated Presidential candidate and Chavez ally Ollanta Humala, is founding a movement which is best described as Inco-fascist. A few months ago, Sao Paulo, Brazil was wracked with massive gang violence which left over two dozen dead. Highly organized and extremely violent Central American gangs operate across national borders and into the United States. The combination of financial support, technical know-how, and tens of thousands of easy to use, extremely deadly, assault weapons could turn these low-level conflicts into civil war and insurgency.

Chavez has, in General Craddock's words, been "exporting instability." If Chavez's vision prevails, decades of work could be undone and Latin America could again become the realm of dictatorships and strife.

It is worth noting that this sort of arms transfer is not new to Latin America. Former Peruvian intelligence chief, Vladimiro Montesinos, was recently sentenced to 20 years in prison for selling 10,000 assault weapons to the FARC. (Although he was a "right-winger" because of his efforts against leftist Sendero Luminoso, Montesinos spent a year in hiding in Venezuela - under the protection of the leftwing Chavez.)

For more on Venezuela and Chavez visit my blog.

Tariq Ramadan Denied US Visa

By Bill West

Tariq Ramadan, the controversial Swiss Muslim professor previously denied entry into the United States after he was offered a teaching position at Notre Dame two years ago, has officially been denied another US entry visa according to published media reports today as well as a release on Ramadan’s own Web site. Ramadan’s version seems to exculpate him from any links to supporting terrorism. He says the State Department denial letter claims the visa was not issued because he gave a small amount of money to a charity in France that helped Palestinians and this is evidence the US Government believes he does not support terrorism (and that he does not engage in “double-speak”). The media reports indicate a statement from the State Department noting otherwise; that the visa denial was in fact, "based solely on his actions, which constituted providing material support to a terrorist organization."

It is possible the US Government gave the most "publicly releasable" reason in its denial letter. Especially for visa adjudication purposes under US immigration law, contributing money to a charity determined to be a funding funnel for Hamas could constitute support for terrorism no matter how Ramadan and his supporters might try to spin it. And for visa denial purposes, proof need not be anything close to criminal standards nor even court-use standards...it's all administrative action with virtually no due process rights accorded the foreign-based alien...something that still drives those apologists crazy. And this may be only one item of evidence the Government has against him. If so, it is merely what they chose to publicly release in the official denial document because in these visa adjudication proceedings all it takes is one such basis. Something else that drives the apologists nuts.

Perhaps before the United States grants every person on planet earth that is involved in every and any legal proceeding that in any way involves the United States the full panoply of Constitutional and civil rights enjoyed by US citizens and residents living within the borders of America, “We the People” of the United States should grant our Government officials some degree of latitude in dealing with issues like keeping some foreign nationals out of this country. Ironically, at times the hue and cry over uncontrolled immigration seems to have been turned on its head in the Ramadan case.

"Political Islam," Islamists and the War on Terror

By Douglas Farah

The U.S. intelligence community has only a single office devoted to understanding political Islam. That is one of the stunning nuggets contained in the recent House Intelligence Committee Report on threats to the United States.

That information, coupled with an interview in Harper's Magazine of Dr. Emile A. Nakhleh, the former director of the Political Islam Strategic Analysis Program at the CIA, seems to me to point a fundamental, residual problem in the government and intelligence community's approach to Islamists.

The House report, while disputed in its timing and presentation by Democrats, nonetheless presents some interesting findings, some that are particularly critical of the administration. The report found "significant shortfalls" in the government's knowledge of Islamist militancy at home or abroad. It concluded that there are "still gaps in our understanding of Islamist extremist groups, which leave America vulnerable."

At the same time, Nakhleh is saying that political Islam "is not a threat." What does political Islam mean? Can you possibly say that and ignore the political decision of the rulers of Saudi Arabia to put billions of dollars into teaching children to hate the wider world, everyone who is not a Salafist and non-religion based knowledge? The Pakistani decision to allow madrasas to continue to funtion as educational institutions when they teach the rote memorization of the Koran, accompanied only by the teachings of hatred. Does political Islam not embrace the (fundamentally political) international Muslim Brotherhood and its broadbased support of armed Islamist movements? The sharia movements in Northern Nigeria? Somalia in its current state? Sudan? My entire blog is here.

British Kill Omar al-Faruq, Key Al Qaeda Operative, in Basra (updated)

By Andrew Cochran

British troops have killed Omar al-Faruq, major Al Qaeda operative, in Basra. Al-Faruq, a Kuwaiti, has been described as the most senior Al Qaeda figure in southeast Asia and a key link to Indonesia's Jemaah Islamiah. He was captued in Indonesia in 2002 and was one of four terrorists who escaped from the Bagram air base prison near Kabul in June 2005. Al-Faruq set up the first Al Qaeda training camp in Southeast Asia in Mindinao (Philippines) with the Moro Islamic Liberation Front (MILF) in 1994. In 1998, he went to Indonesia and later took credit for the 1999 bombing of a mosque there (to trigger Christian attacks against Muslims) and the Philippine ambassador's house in Jakarta. The al-Faruq arrest has been described as one of the outgrowths of the arrest of high-ranking Al Qaeda leader Abu Zubaydah in March 2002.

On March 31, 2005, Zachary Abuza wrote here that, "The links between the MILF and Jemaah Islamiyah, a regional affiliate of Al Qaeda that is responsible for three major terrorist attacks in Indonesia since October 2002, are clear and convincing. MILF offered JI training facilities in its camps in the 1990s; and several hundred JI members were trained by Al Qaeda operatives including Omar al-Faruq, Omar Al-Hadrani and al-Mughira al-Gaza'iri. The number of Indonesians in MILF camps, however, has decreased dramatically in the past few years."

This is a significant kill for which the British deserve lots of credit. The fact that al-Faruq was killed in Basra, presumed center for Iraq's Shiites and where Sunni insurgents are definitely not welcome, is fascinating and troubling. Hopefully British, Iraqi, and American intel are working overtime to learn why he was there, how he traveled there, and his means of support. It's not difficult to imagine that his presence in the area was discovered by Shiites and passed to the British, which would explain why they used 200 troops in the pre-dawn raid in which they killed him. The British Major in charge of the operation is quoted as saying, "We tracked this terrorist down to Basra, where we identified that he was in a particular house in the center of Basra and we launched the operation in the early hours of this morning." The BBC reports that al-Faruq "had been tracked across Iraq to Basra." The AP reports that "al-Farouq entered Iraq three months ago, was known to be an expert in bomb making and went by the name Mahmoud Ahmed while in Basra." Sounds like they had lots of help from inside and possibly outside Iraq, perhaps from a variety of intel sources.

The AP quotes Ken Conboy from an interview last year about al-Faruq.

Democracy in the Muslim world

By Lorenzo Vidino

Today's Boston Globe ran an op-ed I wrote about spreading democracy in the Muslim world:

IN RECENT WEEKS, President Bush has delivered a series of major speeches outlining his strategy against terrorism. We have come a long way from the nebulous rhetoric of the immediate aftermath of Sept. 11, 2001.

The foe is no longer defined as ``terror," which is simply a tool used by a well-defined adversary. The new ``National Strategy for Combating Terrorism" acknowledges that America's enemy is a ``transnational movement of extremist organizations . . . which have in common that they exploit Islam and use terrorism for ideological ends." The report then outlines measures to confront that challenge. While short-term measures such as denying terrorists sanctuary or tracking their funds seem logical , the administration's long-term strategy is less straightforward.

The obvious cure to the problem is tackling radical Islam, the ideology that motivates terrorists. But the administration believes firmly -- almost blindly -- that democracy is the right medicine. According to the report, democracy ``diminishes the underlying conditions terrorists seek to exploit." Promotion of democracy is, therefore, the key element in the administration's long-term approach.

Yet democracy does not always have these healing powers. The administration contends that individuals who enjoy political participation and can freely express themselves are less likely to embrace fundamentalist messages. The truth is that today democratic societies are spawning terrorists no less than dictatorships are.

The core Sept. 11 hijackers grew up under autocratic Middle Eastern regimes, yet embraced radical Islam only when they went to study in Germany. The young terrorist suspects arrested in London and Toronto, the vast majority of whom were second-generation Muslim immigrants in the West, shunned the values of their native societies and planned attacks against them. A recent round of routine Al Qaeda threats against the United States were delivered on tape by Adam Gahdan, who grew up in democratic Southern California.

Aside from not guaranteeing results, spreading democracy in the Muslim world is a monumental effort that requires changing cultures and overcoming entrenched skepticisms. Some oppose the concept because it clashes with their divinely ordered vision of government. For Islamists, a small but vocal minority in the Muslim world, the only source of legislation is God and his will is set in the Sharia; parliaments and other democratic institutions are illegitimately trying to replace God's will with man's. Others look at democracy with suspicion, as a form of government imposed by foreign forces.

A word often abused by local autocrats who cloaked themselves with it, democracy is viewed as just one of the ide