Commentary on “Azzam the American’s” Diatribe

By Jeffrey Cozzens

Following every significant (or markedly different) statement or video issued by al-Qa'ida (AQ) personalities, American media and government officials grapple with myriad concerns such as whether cryptic signals were included in the message to encourage specific attacks, whether the AQ core was simply trying to “maintain relevance,” whether it was trying to “soften its image” and play politics, etc. This overwhelmingly Western, tactical, and self-reinforcing mode of approaching global jihadi discourse distracts us from the typically strategic content of al-Qa’ida’s commentaries, and the myriad audiences to which it is directed. This is the type of mirror imaging we need to replace with more sophisticated understanding of these messages’ content. Michael Scheuer framed this argument well in a recent Jamestown’s Terrorism Focus article.

Few statements from the AQ core have a tactical application; they generally reflect long-term strategic imperatives and focus (sometimes implicitly) on the belief-based parameters of their conflict with “apostates” and “Zionist-Crusaders.” Besides laundry lists of Western “crimes” against the ummah (global Muslim community), the theme of religious obligation to fight jihad is discussed most often. The statements inextricably fuse these current geopolitical issues and grievances (and perceptions thereof) with the deeply personal and often mystical nature of jihadi contention. But in light of the hour-long 2 September video allegedly made by Adam Gadahn (aka, “Azzam al-Amriki,” translated as “Azzam the American”), does this paradigm hold, or is there something more ominous in his statement suggestive of imminent attack? While we cannot know with certainly, analysis of the video’s intended audiences may at least point us in the right direction.

In agreement with Scheuer, besides the offers of conversion made to non-Muslims, this video is directed primarily at different Muslim listeners. This is the singularly most important aspect of the video, and the sub-themes that emerge from Azzam’s message to these audiences are worthy of critical analysis if the threat from the video is to be accurately assessed.

The first point for analysis suggests that Azzam’s video is a continuance of long-time AQ efforts to satisfy the evidentiary standards for attack required by Salafi scholars, whose blessing (or simple lack of condemnation) is crucial for the global jihadi movement to secure in order to both frame their fight as defensive and expand movement participation. Scheuer notes this implicitly, but he focuses more on the aspect of da’wa (call to Islam) than on AQ’s equally crucial efforts to frame its fight defensively. This is why “Azzam” enumerates in the video a series of perceived injustices which, as a whole, suggest that Christians and Jews are battling Islam itself, not just its jihadi vanguard—a long-time theme of previous AQ diatribes that has accrued wider currency since 2003. Dr. Bruce Hoffman calls this the “prescience of bin Laden’s narrative.” The logic goes that “anyone” can see that “these events [the Iraq invasion, the U.S. presence in Afghanistan and Iraq, the Israeli military activities in the Palestinian territories and Lebanon, the Abu Ghraib and Guantanomo scandals, etc]…showcase a seething animosity [towards] and definite ignorance of the religion of Islam and the nature of its followers.” Apart from the explicit or implicit approval of these scholars—or simply their silence—AQ engages in “forbidden” warfare against “illegitimate” targets using proscribed means, as many Salafi scholars have determined since 2001 (chiefly because AQ marks other Muslims for violence, a practice known as takfir, and employs suicidal tactics against civilians). As self-appointed “spokesmen” for the global jihadi movement satisfy these evidentiary standards with increasing success (measured by the increase in global jihadi plots and attacks worldwide since 2003) owing to their “prescient” analysis of world events, more individuals participate in one way or another in the movement. However, it must be stated emphatically that this is not a new trend.

True, the statement is in many ways unique. Unlike past AQ statements, which offer some criticism of “Christian” Western nations for not living-up to the tenets of their faith, Azzam rather uncharacteristically (at least for statements linked to the AQ core) attacks the substance of Christianity at great length, adding a new, radical degree of polarity between the “camps of belief and disbelief.” However, the message is aimed primarily at Muslims; it is not so much an offensive tactic of “psychological warfare,” even if the purveyor of the message (Azzam) does have the simultaneous effect of sowing fear in Western audiences as an American jihadi. This is very much in keeping with AQ’s preferred theme of overt religious warfare, which forces “real Muslims” to take sides—especially if the kuffar (unbelievers) have been invited (according to the Prophetic Model) to profess shahada (the declaration of faith) and refuse. As an American convert to Islam who fought with Arab forces in the Soviet jihad told me, AQ’s jihad is about “separating the wheat from the chaff” within the Muslim community; thus, Azzam’s message could be summarized as “Christians, by nature of their corrupted beliefs and actions, are not only misguided but also implacably hostile to Islam, and true Muslims should fight them everywhere as a defense against their schemes unless they repent and convert.” This message should be widely denounced by Muslims globally as it contradicts the “exceptional” Qu’ranic standing of “People of the Book” (Jews and Christians).

Finally, it is important to realize that Azzam’s statement was pointedly aimed at Western Muslims—especially recent converts—in addition to those in the West he summons to embrace Islam:

I can't tell you how delighted I was to receive news of the embracing of Islam by a number of U.S. soldiers at the hands of the Muslim mujahideen imprisoned at some of the American concentration camps, which blacken the globe. And I ask God to benefit Islam and Muslims with them, and that He make them a role model for their comrades. (MEMRI translation)

The clear implication here is that these soldiers should “benefit Islam” by becoming “role models” in the jihad in a manner reminiscent of the Egyptian jihadis within Sadat’s army who turned against the state. This analysis is bolstered by Azzam’s later statement:

I don't think a freedom struggle could wish for a better endorsement, to have its cause picked up by a courageous group from within the oppressor nation itself. Well, you shouldn't be surprised, because, after all, it is the duty of every Muslim to fight evil and oppression, wherever he finds it and no matter who the evil-doers might be. (MEMRI translation)

Moreover, with apparent reference to Western Muslims who are “sitting on the fence” and only interested in the propagation of Islam apart from jihad (which, in Azzam’s worldview, is the “apogee of Islam”) he said: “But what really is surprising is that some among us want to suffice with invitation alone, without resorting to self-defense, when the enemy insists upon aggression and wanton destruction” (MEMRI translation). Azzam’s message is simple: Western Muslims must embrace jihad, especially since their countrymen are waging war against their religion and their brethren at home and abroad. Quit prevaricating and fight.

Do these and other messages contained within the video suggest an imminent attack? While we cannot say with certainty, they appear to be a unique variation on the theme of framing the global jihad defensively and “awakening” Western Islamic activists from mere da’wa to jihad as an individual obligation. True, the video is full of disturbing, generally original features, including (among others):
•A rant against Christianity by an American jihadi convert
•Al-Zawahiri’s endorsement of this individual by name, who appears in a nearly one-hour English da’wa video, complete with American colloquialisms
•The singling-out of specific “enemies” beyond the political leadership (including some Counterterrorism Blog experts)
•An implied appeal to American soldier converts to rise-up and fight jihad

However, these do not necessarily suggest an attack is imminent. As Michael Scheuer himself wrote, the video is likely “part of an al-Qaeda effort that began early in 2002” to fulfill the stipulations of Salafi just war theory. The threat implied in the video might be tomorrow, or it might be in five years’ time. This makes it more a strategic than tactical problem. Moreover, those who eventually carry-out the operation may not be connected other than ideologically to bin Laden, al-Zawahiri, and/or Azzam the American. All we can say with certainty is that the video adds yet another brick to the al-Qa’ida project for legitimizing global violence against “Islam’s” enemies; attributing too much tactical weight to the video makes it all the more effective.

Jeffrey Cozzens is Research Associate at the Centre for the Study of Terrorism and Political Violence (CSTPV), University of St Andrews.

TrackBack