Reports of Zarqawi’s demotion is old news, but provides further insight on al Qaeda’s view of the state of jihad in Iraq
I’ve received numerous inquires about the recent reports that Abu Musab al-Zarqawi has been replaced as the commander of al Qaeda in Iraq, and have been asked why I am not discussing this issue. The reality is I have already discussed this issue, about three weeks ago on March 15th, in a post titled “Civil War” & Where’s Zarqawi?. An excerpt:
In the atmosphere of open warfare between al Qaeda and the Sunnis, questions are beginning to arise about the whereabouts of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi. SITE Institute’s Rita Katz notes that since the Mujahideen Shura Council was formed in Iraq last month, Zarqawi has been virtually silent; “A few days after the council was established, Al Qaeda in Iraq ceased to post communiqu
43 Comments
Hi Bill: We just read Jack Kelly’s piece in the National Weekly Edition of The Washingtom Times. “Unreported news from the front lines”. I’m a subscriber of the only good “Times”. Sorry We missed you on CNN. I never watch CNN it effects my blood pressure. Jack & Gill, Medford NJ
This is clear propaganda on the part of Zarqawi himself. It is designed to convince Iraqis, Arabs in the region, and the international community that the Iraq insurgents are again “legitimite resistance fighters” and not terrorists.
This is a sign Zarqawi is having massive PR problems, but the rest of it is totally false.
Zarqawi cares far more about winning then he does his ego. So he is more then willing to make up a fictious person “Mr. Baghdadi” (who according to US and Iraqi Intel writes exactly like Zarqawi) and have that person be the one taking credit for attacks.
Zarqawi is the head of his own insanely loyal transnational terrorist group he built over a decade. There is no one who could fire or demote him even if they wanted. Basically, Zarqawi knew his name, his face, and even the name of his group was hurting his effort to drive the US out and gain Iraqi and Arab sympathy for his cause. So, he simply created a fictious person (Mr. Baghdadi) as the head of his group and he changed the name of his group.
He basically put lipstick on a pig hoping people would see it differently. Even the NY Times saw though this trick.
————————————————-
From the NY Times from two months ago.
Last month, something unusual happened: Al-Qaeda in Iraq changed its name. Or it seemed to. Al-Qaeda in Iraq announced that it had joined something called the Mujahadeen Shura, a council of insurgent leaders that was headed – surprise – by an Iraqi. The leader’s name, in case anyone missed the point, was Abdullah al-Baghdadi.
A senior Iraqi security official, who insisted on not being identified by name, said he had been following “Mr. Baghdadi’s” writings, and found them remarkably similar to those of Al Qaeda’s leader, Abu Musab al-Zarqawi.
Such tricks are hardly limited to Al-Qaeda. For months, gunmen with the Badr Corps, the Iranian-trained militia loyal to the Supreme Council, have guarded the home of the party’s chief, Abdul Aziz Hakim.
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/02/05/weekinreview/05filkins.html
Strongly Disagree, ECH.
Abu Masayrah al-Iraqi is the person who writes the press releases, not Zarqawi. The reason the releases may look the same is that Masayrah is very likely still writing them.
Zarqawi was officially established of leader of AQIZ after he swore bayat (the oath of loyalty) in 2004 (he was still AQ then, just not high in the inner circle). The communiques between Zarwaqi & Zawahiri, as well as the displeasure expressed by Barqawi (his mentor), show serious divisions within AQHQ on Zarqawi’s actions.
I’ll also disagree that Zarqawi cares more about winning than his ego. In fact, Zarqawi has worked quite hard to build himself up as “The Sheik of Slaughters”. One of the reasons Zarqawi was not accepted into the inner circles of AQ until recently (around 2002 – 2003) is that he was viewed as too much of a loose cannon and too violent. The Harmony documents show this.
We’ll just have to agree to disagree on this one.
…and I don’t rely much on Dexter Filkins for my analysis of al-Qaeda. But that’s just me.
Even assuming that Zarqawi was fired, I can’t imagine that anyone in al Qaeda has the ability to enforce that. Zarqawi clearly has the power and the protection to stay in Iraq and do what he wants, regardless of what face anyone puts on it.
On the other hand, assuming that Zarqawi finally realized that he was losing in Iraq, he might have decided that it was time to move on. The fact that he has disappeared from visibility is worrisome. If, for instance, Zarqawi surfaces in Palestine, that’s bad for a lot of people, not just the US and Israel, but also Lebanon, Jordan, and Egypt, among others.
Zarqawi’s location does matter. His “title” doesn’t. The man has a supreme talent for chaos and destruction, and no one should rest easy until he is dead.
My guess would be Abu Abdelrahman al-Iraqi is Mr. Abdullah al-Baghdadi. He’s also known as Abdel Rahman Yasin. You know, the guy that helped al-Qaeda conduct the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 and fled to Iraq and was given “shelter” by Saddam…
My guess he is Mr. Abdullah al-Baghdadi as putting him in charge would just hit a little too close to home for America. Iraq, al-Qaeda and the WTC attack, secular government sponsoring terrorism, you know the drill…..
Bill said: “There is no greater expression of headquarters’ displeasure with results the than the demotion or firing of a regional commander.”
Thanks for weighing in on this subject. I recall when you addressed this matter several weeks back, way ahead of the mainstream media outlets. As for the expression of displeasure from HQ, I can think of one greater one that what we are told has taken place… if they sent “Z” to the wall, i.e. had him face a firing squad. However, desirable, such an outcome seems unlikely, for now at least.
Zarqawi may have pledged “Bayat” to Bin Laden as a way to seal their allience, but from every terror expert and military intel guy I have heard or talked to, Zarqawi and Bin Laden may have an allience, but no one gives orders to Zarqawi. He gets advice from the al-Qaeda leadership and others, and he is the one who chooses if he wants to take that advice to heart or not. Zarqawi’s terrorist group he created over the span of years is not loyal to Bin Laden it is loyal to Zarqawi alone.
Zarqawi has however taken Zawhiri’s advice to put an Iraqi face onto his group. And, the Sr leadership of Jama’at al-Tawhid wal-Jihad is moving from foreign hands into Iraqi hands as the attrition of war and less foreign fighters coming in causes the terrorist group to replace foreign jihadist leaders killed in battle with Iraqis.
al-Qaeda in Iraq, al-Tawhid wal-Jihad, or whatever you want to call Zarqawi’s network now has an Iraqi face and is mostly led by Iraqis. Zarqawi is not interested in fighting and dying in Iraq and turning the leadership of his organization over to Iraqis allows him to focus his attention on moving into Lebanon and Gaza and moving on to what Zawhiri described in his letter as the next phase of jihad.
Diane,
the answer is and always is: Money. al-Qaeda throws a lot of money at Iraq. Cutting it off would be quite painful to AQIZ and its network. Military commanders inside and outside of Iraq have repeatedly told me “al-Qaeda’s greatest weapon is money.” That applies to all levels of the game. If you read al-Qaeda documents, you will see that AQ members, from footsoldiers all the way up to Zawahiri, are obscessed with their cash flows. Oh, and their favorite currency is the USD ($$$).
Starling,
Yes you are correct, how very “Western” of me in my thinking… and I think you are guilty of the same… perhaps a good beheading would be apt justice for Zarqawi…
The answer is and always is: Money. al-Qaeda throws a lot of money at Iraq. Cutting it off would be quite painful to AQIZ and its network. Military commanders inside and outside of Iraq have repeatedly told me “al-Qaeda’s greatest weapon is money.” That applies to all levels of the game.
———————————————
Zarqawi may be influenced by his wealthy backers in the Gulf, but the al-Qaeda high leadership itself is not funding Zarqawi. Zawhiri asking Zarqawi for 100,000 makes that very clear. The al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan is hurting for money.
ECH,
The alliance, or regional model, local affilliate, or however it is described, is correct. However part of the benefits of Zarqawi entering the “aliance” is accepting cash, resources and direction from “The Base”. The relationship isn’t all one sided, to Zarqawi’s advantage. AQ has demands as well.
Again, we’ll have to agree to disagree.
Saudi backers look to the base for advice on where to invest, and some of these backers are AQ themselves (AKA “The Golden Chain”). The rumors of AQ Pakistan hurting for cash is exaggerated, and I think Zawahiri’s statement about money was misinterpreted. Look at what AQ is doing in Pakistan’s NWFP. That requires serious resources.
Bill,
I understand what you’re saying about money as the fuel for the insurgency. I’m just not convinced that al Qaeda can successfully cut Zarqawi off from the money spigot, as long as Zarqawi is alive and free to operate in Iraq. Nor am I convinced that they would want to cut him off. If he’s still “military commander” then he has a lot of power, not just within the insurgency, but also for revenge against al Qaeda, if he decides that he wants revenge for being demoted. Or maybe he asked to be demoted, if it deflects the heat from the US and Iraqi forces. There’s too much that we don’t know.
If Zarqawi decides to relocate to Palestine, I’m sure there are others who would pay his way, starting with Iran.
The alliance, or regional model, local affilliate, or however it is described, is correct. However part of the benefits of Zarqawi entering the “aliance” is accepting cash, resources and direction from “The Base”. The relationship isn’t all one sided, to Zarqawi’s advantage. AQ has demands as well.
———————————————-
The al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan is hurting badly for money. The oil barons in the Gulf that have historically funded terrorist groups have been funneling mega cash into Zarqawi’s coffers. If I was a wahhibi oil barron and I wanted to see America knocked down a peg I would give my money to Zarqawi who is closer by then Afghanistan and whose attacks get 10 times the press coverage of attacks that happen in Afghanistan. That said taking his battle to Jordan may have been a big no no for the oil barrons.
Zarqawi has been sending a part of that money to the al-Qaeda leadership in Pakistan. What Zarqawi has gotten out of the deal is that the connection to al-Qaeda has given his organization a greater global reach and a much greater access to potental young wahhibis in Saudi Arabia and the surrounding Arab countries.
I’m just not convinced that al Qaeda can successfully cut Zarqawi off from the money spigot, as long as Zarqawi is alive and free to operate in Iraq.
———————————————
Not only that but half of the money is coming from kidnappings each week, extortion, banditry, and protection money paid by wealthy Iraqis to avoid attacks on them.
http://www.usatoday.com/news/world/iraq/2006-02-07-kidnappings_x.htm
I’m reluctant to believe anything about the financial status of AQ in Pakistan, until I see their quarterly filings with the SEC. Obsession with cash flow only indicates miserliness, which is hardly the gravest of their sins.
There is certainly much for the Saudi terror financiers to gain in Pakistan, especially with Iran rattling the nuclear sabre. A successful revolution in Pakistan would have a very high payback. It might appear to be a faster payback, given AQ’s difficulties in Iraq.
ECH
You need a blog where you can post with links to all your sources of information. If you have one please post the link.
You need a blog where you can post with links to all your sources of information. If you have one please post the link.
—————————————–
Newsweek reported last year that al-Qaeda in Pakistan was really hurting for money until there allience with Tawid al-Jihad. Its at the very end of the article if you care to read it.
———
“I’m the person who broke the silence and solved the difficulties between Zarqawi and the Al Qaeda leadership,” he told Zabihullah. Donations to Al Qaeda’s coffers had dried up as bin Laden’s top men were killed or captured. Now private money is once again flooding in.
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/7369892/site/newsweek/page/2/
ECH,
My sources tell me different about Pakistan and AQ’s cash flows there. Where do you think all of those shiny weapons and new camps being set up in Waziristan come from? Pakistan and their nukes have always been a target of AQ, as has the humiliation of America and NATO (as diane clearly grasps). And diane also reiterates my points about al-Qaeda’s “miserliness”.
Regardless of what we think the motivations or reasons are for the public reliquishing of command, the fact that this had to be done shows there is a clear problem in al-Qaeda’s strategy and tactics in Iraq. I think we can agree on that.
My post above makes clear I know al-Qaeda in Pakistan is getting money. But, my belief on the topic coincides with what Al-Iraqi said in the Newsweek article that Zarqawi and Bin Laden’s strategic alliance is responsable to a large degree for money flowing back into Pakistan.
Sorry to jump in on the middle of a good back-and-fourth, guys, but I just have to ask about Abdel Rahman Yasin. Do you really think he’s alive and well and still living in Iraq, Bill? What makes you think that he’s the same guy as this al-Baghdadi guy? Why would HE be the new face (or voice, whatever) of the jihad in Iraq?
Also, isn’t he supposed to be dead?
ECH,
I don’t think bin Laden and Zawahiri rose to the level they have in the jihadi world and then just suddenly became (pardon my expression) whores to Zarqawi.
Colin,
Abdel Rahman Yasin was the #2 in the AQIZ organization before it became the MSC. Abdelrahman is an experienced jihadi, an Iraqi (the “Iraqi face” needed), a seasoned AQ member (probably 15 years of experience), well connected, knows Iraq. AQ doesn’t like to promote unknowns.
His whereabouts are unknown after the invasion in 2003, but AQIZ made him their #2…. My guess is he is alive, well and active.
I’m speculating here, by the way. I have no outside information to back this up.
I don’t think bin Laden and Zawahiri rose to the level they have in the jihadi world and then just suddenly became (pardon my expression) whores to Zarqawi.
———————————————
When did I ever say they were? In fact I made it quite clear that they have a very mutually benifical allience that brings in more money for Zawhiri and Bin Laden. In turn it increases Zarqawi’s recruiting pool of young jihadis that want to be a part of the war al-Qaeda started on 911.
The allience gives the al-Qaeda leadership the ability to say we are relevent and a part of the central front in the War on Terror in the heart of the Arab world. And, it also gives Zarqawi a greater ability to gain influence terror cells in Europe and elsewhere by being part of the al-Qaeda brand name. There are benifits for both sides with the deal.
He must be one of the more inconvenient facts all of the “no connection between Iraq and terrorism” crowd have to deal with.
Also, what exactly did you mean when you said this: “as putting him in charge would just hit a little too close to home for America”?
Do you think he would be put in charge as an intentional provocation to the Americans? If so, why not use the Abdel Rahman Yasin name, a name many Americans would know?
I know, you were just throwing that out there as speculation. It just raises a lot of questions.
Relax, ECH, it’s called an expression, as I clearly stated. I understand your point, and disagree with the level of significance you place on Zarqawi in driving money to Osama & Co. We disagree on the nature of their relationship and how funds are driven to al-Qaeda. Fair enough in my book. No need to belabor the point.
Here is an article from a month ago about al-Qaeda in Iraq’s command structure.
—————–
In the new hierarchy al-Zarqawi’s number two would be Abu Abdel Rahman al-Iraqi who also has the role of ‘interior minister’ and oversees the internal affairs of the organisation.
‘religious affairs’ post has been given to Sheikh Abu Hamza al-Baghdadi, who issues fatwas and other religious edicts as well as overseeing the spiritual life of the group.
http://www.adnki.com/index_2Level_English.php?cat=Terrorism&loid=8.0.269737886&par=
Colin,
Actually, raising his profile would be bad for al-Qaeda in Iraq, as it would draw associations with an attack on US soil, al-Qaeda and Iraq’s offer of sanctuary to Abdelrahman. It might actually increase the US public’s support of the war. Which is why he would take on a different name.
He could be ignored by the media as #2 but not as #1. How many times have you heard his name in the press lately, anyway?
Well, that a pretty obvious “none”.
If raising his profile is a bad move on the part of al Qaeda or the MSC or whatever they are calling themselves in Iraq, then why would they do it? Because they didn’t have anyone else? Becasue it was his turn? Would that make him the Bob Dole of the jihad in Iraq? (no offense intended towards Bob Dole)
Huthayfah Azzam also had an article on NPR yesterday.
I will type it up for you guys.
Insurgents have learned to adapt to U.S. tactics and seem to be taking public opinion into account. In the last year, many Sunni insurgent groups have challenged Zarqawi’s terror tactics, which has led to open internal battles, says Assam.
Mr. Assam: And finally he has to change himself and his way; or he has to leave. We’re still working very hard on that. But, in the last month the split has been put aside he says. The five main parties of the Iraqi resistance were united with Zarqawi and they are working together now. Iraqi and Western Analysits say the rift ended with the upsurge of Sunni/Shia killing following the bombing of a reviered Shia shrine.
Joost Hilterman of the International Crisis Group, says that violence explains the newfound unity among foreign fighters and the Iraqi insurgents. If there any chance for a rift it was destoryed in the immediate aftermath of the bombing and as long as there is attacks by Shia Islamic groups against Sunni Arabs as a community the insurgents will remain unified as a protector.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=5319166
By the way I typed that up while listening to the audio clip for those that don’t want to listen to the NPR audio report.
By the way if anyone wants to know what I think Zarqawi is doing today this article says exactly what I think.
——————
Al Qaida network chief Abu Mussib Al Zarqawi has lowered his profile in Iraq to focus on operations in the Levant. “Zarqawi is very busy these days,” an intelligence source said. “But his attention is moving from Iraq to the Gaza Strip.” The sources said Al Zarqawi has been forming ties with Palestinian insurgents in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. They said Al Zarqawi has begun to cooperate with the head of the military wing of Hamas, Mohammed Deif. They said that in 2006, about a dozen Al Qaida operatives entered the Gaza Strip to form cells
http://www.menewsline.com/stories/2006/april/04_06_3.html
Colin,
I think you misunderstand what I am saying. The al-Baghdadi monicker may be Abdelrahman “cover”. That is if al-Baghdadi is a ficticious person.
Bill, I actually hope you’re correct about the replacement for #2. It gives maximum incentive to our soldiers(not that they do not have enuf) and to our public it wakes them up again. So, if this is true and we can connect him to 93, let it be told far and wide.
Michael, unless he releases an audio tape which I am sure he will not do if Bill is right about who it is the US will never know it is him or if Mr. Baghdadi even exists until they catch him.
Right now all they have is Mr. Bagdadi’s writings that Iraqi intel says look alot like Zarqawi’s writings.
“Right now all they have is Mr. Bagdadi’s writings that Iraqi intel says look alot like Zarqawi’s writings”….because Zarqawi doesn’t write the press releases, Abu Masayrah al-Iraqi does, as he did for Zarqawi….
The Global Islamic Media Front (GIMF) distributed a message today, April 3, 2006, in both English and Arabic to a password-protected jihadist forum, written by Abu Abdulrahman al-Baghdadi, which develops an argument about the concept of “civil war”
I think he, Zarqawi, is quietly running things from behind the scenes.
————————————–
I think he is moving his focus from Iraq to the Levant. He might have even left the country.
http://www.boston.com/news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/03/13/the_coming_new_wave_of_jihad/
From the “password protected” jihadi site: “the Western media has “cleverly changed”
ECH,
Just can’t give it up, can you?
If Abdelrahman is the commander al-Baghdadi, its a possibility. A while back I asked the question several CT experts whose opinion I trust about who writes the press releases for AQIZ, as I was interested in a few odds & ends. They said Masayrah writes them. That doesn’t mean Zarqawi didn’t provide input, but explains why the styles between Zarqawi & Baghdadi would be similar.
March 2001 Document: Saddam Regime Recruits Suicide Terrorists to Hit US Interests (Translation)
“#6 Comment below posted by: Bill Roggio [TypeKey Profile Page] at April 5, 2006 03:37 PM
My guess would be Abu Abdelrahman al-Iraqi is Mr. Abdullah al-Baghdadi. He’s also known as Abdel Rahman Yasin. You know, the guy that helped al-Qaeda conduct the first World Trade Center bombing in 1993 and fled to Iraq and was given “shelter” by Saddam…
My guess he is Mr. Abdullah al-Baghdadi as putting him in charge would just hit a little too close to home for America. Iraq, al-Qaeda and the WTC attack, secular government sponsoring terrorism, you know the drill…..”
Perhaps Leslie Stahl could interview him again…?
MG Lynch says they are seeing no change in Zarqawi’s status on the ground…
Here is a very informative piece by Evan Kohlmann of the Counterterrorism Blog titled Countering the “New Dayton”, A Shift in Strategy for Abu Musab al-Zarqawi in Iraq. A must read.
http://www.globalterroralert.com/pdf/0406/msciraqinsurgency.pdf
After reading Kohlmann’s piece, Bill’s post, the comments and other sources, my two main observations are:
The toughest question is, did Zarqawi’s demotion actually happen or is it just a PR stunt. I lean toward it being a PR stunt.
What is not nearly as difficult to see is that the state of jihad in Iraq is crumbling. Thus, the most drastic action yet by AQIZ, the Feb. 22 bombing of the Al-Askariyya mosque in Samarra.