An Al-Qaeda Blunder?

We are so used to reading analysts reports of how intelligently Al-qaeda avails itself of the news media to advance its cause that perhaps we are becoming numb to some underlying realities. Maybe a big part of the supposed Al-qaeda success comes from shooting-yourself-in-the-foot blunders from people on our own side (obviously those responsible for the ‘disinformation’ in the Jean Charles de Menezes case immediately spring to mind here), and the Al-qaeda in-house material may in fact damage more than assist their cause (I somehow doubt that video-grabs of people getting beheaded, or having their throat slit as was the case with poor Daniel Pearl, are exactly vote winners for them). And this latest example may be a classic case. By releasing the video showing Mohammed Sidique Khan explaining his reasoning (or lack of it) they have in one foul swoop killed-off all the crazy conspiracy theories (like the ones that put it all down to Blair and British security), settled the issue (yes, they were suicide bombers) and forced the UK muslim community to come out of denial (where they were still in it) and face up to what is actually going on in their midst. Well good for them!

This entry was posted on Saturday, September 3rd, 2005 at 12:30 pm and is filed under A Fistful Of Euros, Terrorism. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

1. Marcin Says:
   September 4th, 2005 at 12:52 am

   The point of terrorism is not just to cause mayhem, striking at the popular sense of security, undermining the authority of the state (or whoever is responsible for security in the target society). It is also to raise consciousness, and in this way, releasing the video now was a masterstroke - they have allowed all sorts of reasonable-sounding speculation to run, and now revealed that they really were behind the attack. This will both lend more credibility to the idea that they are behind any other attacks that take place, and force people to acknowledge the reality of their influence and ability to recruit. This is likely to have the effect of polarising sentiment further, allowing them to make use of the hugely unjust and, from certain reports, illegal response of the goverment, to radicalise those who have been touched by such injustices, who will be susceptible to the idea that there is a sizeable body of support for islamism, having seen it at work. I presume that they also hope that it will have the effect of inspiring in the British people a desire to see a total disengagement from the middle east, as without the support of the West, the unsavoury regimes who control the region would be more vulnerable to islamist revolution. The converse hopefully should also be true, with the vast body of muslims working to oppose the influence of islamism, and the majority of the populace as a whole realising that we need a credible response that preserves what is good about our society, rather than continuing down a route that when followed to its end would lead to the fracture of our values, misshaping our society from its current form into one of totalitarian injustice. More difficult to say is whether the political establishment will be able to find a middle course between our current foreign policy which is reprehensible and stokes terrorism, and outright disengagement and appeasement. I suspect not, though.