Craig Whitlock
Washington Post Berlin Bureau Chief
Monday, September 10, 2007
11:00 AM
Washington Post foreign correspondent Craig Whitlock was online Monday, Sept. 10 at 11 a.m. ET to discuss how al-Qaeda has rebuilt its central leadership and organization in Pakistan since President Bush declared it shut down in 2003.
The New Al-Qaeda Central: Far From Declining, the Network Has Rebuilt, With Fresh Faces and a Vigorous Media Arm, (Post, Sept. 9)
The transcript follows.
____________________
Craig Whitlock: Hi everyone. It's the day before Sept. 11, 2007, and al-Qaeda is stealing headlines again.
_______________________
Islamabad, Pakistan: U.S. is doing everything to curb al-Qaeda in the whole world, so why is the U.S. losing the war against the extremists? How can one say that al-Qaeda is reviving when Allied Forces are doing their best in Afghanistan to eliminate al-Qaeda and the Taliban? If the U.S. and its Allies are failing to root out the terrorist organization, who will win the war against this monster and how?
Craig Whitlock: A good question, but it's really two in one -- rounding up al-Qaeda leaders won't eliminate the broader problems that the United States and other countries, including Pakistan, face from Islamic extremism.
U.S. and NATO forces have gone after al-Qaeda and the Taliban aggressively in Afghanistan, but they're extremely limited in what they can do in Pakistan -- which is where most of the AQ and Taliban leaders have been holed up.
_______________________
Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif.: The reason ground forces have not entered Pakistan is to keep from having the civilian population topple Musharraf, at least that's the read from the West Coast. But if Musharraf doesn't have control of the tribal regions, and the civilian population is already upset with him, what's the real danger of that happening if we do find out where Zawahiri and bin Laden are?
Craig Whitlock: I think that's partly true. The U.S. government doesn't want to send Musharraf over the edge by going into the Pakistani tribal areas. But how effective would it really be to send in U.S. ground forces into Waziristan and its neighbors? Put it this way: There's no way they'd be greeted as liberators.
_______________________
Rancho Palos Verdes, Calif.: If Bin Laden is in the Chitral region, and Musharraf's forces aren't welcome there, what are we waiting for!? I would be willing to wager that a football field full of soldiers gladly would accept a mission to march on that region, with the goal of capturing or killing Osama bin Laden. So what are we waiting for!?
Craig Whitlock: There has been speculation that bin Laden is in Chitral, but as far as I can tell it's just that: gross speculation. If the U.S. intelligence agencies could pinpoint where bin Laden was, believe me, they already would have gone after him. But I think they really have no idea. There's an excellent chance that sending in a football field of U.S. soldiers would result in them coming up empty-handed, and what would the repercussions of that be?
_______________________
Wheaton, Md.: There seems to be no difference between al-Qaeda in Pakistan now and al-Qaeda under the Taliban 10 years ago. What will it take for the U.S. to go into Pakistan and take out al-Qaeda? Another major attack?
Craig Whitlock: Al-Qaeda is still a structured, centralized organization -- much as it was 10 years ago -- but I think there are major differences. For one, it can't operate fixed training camps and operate with quite the same impunity that it did under the Taliban. You can argue about whether Pakistan has given a 100 percent effort to go after al-Qaeda, but at least they have to hide now.
As I've mentioned to previous posters, I think it's legitimate to question as to whether sending conventional U.S. military forces into Pakistan would do any good, and if it could backfire greatly instead.
_______________________
Boston: How do both moderate Muslims and jihadists view comments from a blonde, female American administration official calling bin Laden "virtually impotent"? I didn't view Townsend as an off-the-deep-end neocon, and given that she used the phrase twice on Sunday shows I assume there was some calculation that this challenge by a woman to a Muslim's manhood would be somehow beneficial to the U.S., but I would like to hear the backstory on exactly why she and others in the administration think this is so. Otherwise, it gets put up there with "dead or alive," "mission accomplished," "bring 'em on," "we're one bomb away from getting rid of the FISA court" and "we're kicking ass" as inappropriate Bush administration comments that make our situation worse.
Craig Whitlock: Your characterization of Frances Fragos Townsend's comments yesterday made me laugh out loud. The administration's assessments can be confusing and contradictory at the least: sometimes they say bin Laden himself still poses a huge threat to the U.S. and its allies; other times, they say he's hiding in a cave, which is the line Townsend repeated yesterday, according to reports I read. I don't know where bin Laden is, but I think most U.S., European and Pakistani counterterrorism officials would agree that a cave is his least likely hiding place.
_______________________
washingtonpost.com: Is there anything the U.S. can do to staunch the flow of al-Qaeda PR messages? Does the government even want to stop them? Some intelligence experts consider the releases and militant Web sites valuable sources of counterterrorism information...
Craig Whitlock: Those are great questions. I've heard that the U.S. government and its allies have intercepted some AQ videos in Pakistan, but in general AQ's media arm, as-Sahab, has been able to churn out videos at an increasingly rapid clip. It's almost impossible to keep up with them all, and then they recirculate on sites forever.
Then again, they do all produce potentially valuable clues in terms of who is important in AQ and if there have been ideological shifts or internal conflicts. Also, you figure sooner or later they're going to be sloppy and make a big mistake that could result in exposing where Osama or Dr. Ayman are.
_______________________
Milan, Italy: Pakistan, much like Saudi Arabia and Egypt, likes to have it both ways -- they claim to be Western allies in the war on terrorism, yet fund and incite anti-Western hatred. Why doesn't the U.S. hold these governments more accountable?
Craig Whitlock: I think that's a generalization, but clearly you've identified a major quandary. For decades, the U.S. government has allied itself with dictators and undemocratic regimes in the Muslim world and props them up, increasingly in exchange for cooperation on counterterrorism -- yet these same partnerships and policies can backfire in the Muslim world and fuel the root problems.
_______________________
Washington: In your opinion, what has changed the most after the Sept. 11 attacks? Please don't answer about politics only, but about regular life, activities, attitudes, etc.
Craig Whitlock: I won't wax philosophical on that one, but clearly one of the biggest changes I've encountered in the U.S., Europe and Middle East since Sept. 11 is the fortress mentality that has taken root. Governments everywhere, especially in the U.S., have ramped up security to unprecedented levels. Maybe we're all headed toward life in the U.K., where there are surveillance cameras everywhere. It's a drag on democracy and incredibly, incredibly expensive.
_______________________
Boston: Just a quick follow-up: Her comments seemed more in line with what she, as an interrogator in Guantanamo, would say to a captured Bin Laden to humiliate and degrade him as part of a softening-up process in private, not something to pull out on TV that would be splashed around the globe and caves to both extreme and moderate Muslim factions. I would not want to be her if they attack again and they turn around and mock her comments. I just don't see the rationale behind the provocative, baiting phrase.
Craig Whitlock: I think those are fair criticisms. Hard to see what that kind of rhetoric will accomplish; it easily can backfire. To be honest, I think the Bush administration has toned down such rhetoric in the past two to three years, but it seems like it resurfaced yesterday to some degree.
_______________________
repudar711: There seem to be a whole lot of Libyans getting active in al-Qaeda at high levels. So Libya gave up terrorism?
Craig Whitlock: The Libyans who increasingly have become active in al-Qaeda's inner circle were all strong opponents of the Gaddafi regime. The Libyan Islamic Fighting Group tried to topple Gaddafi, most notably in the mid-1990s, but failed and largely has become defunct. Many of the key players in that group then turned to al-Qaeda, partly because they were sympathetic with its ideology and partly because they had nowhere else to turn. In fact, Gaddafi's intelligence agencies have become very close to the CIA in recent years, in part because Gaddafi has been spooked by the Islamists seeking to do him in.
_______________________
jaduboy : From this article, it seems to me that little or nothing actually is known about "al-Qaeda Central," and that American eagerness to bomb Pakistan has alienated the public, which was crucial to capturing terrorists. What a fantastic strategy to fight terror.
Craig Whitlock: Trying to determine how al-Qaeda Central operates these days -- who holds the most influence, how they interact with other militants, what their plans are -- is extremely difficult. This organization has been hugely successful at survival in the past two decades, and it purposefully keeps its inner workings opaque.
_______________________
Arlington, Va.: How is al-Qaeda doing vis-a-vis citizens of Saudi Arabia? Are many of the leaders of the group still coming out of Saudi? What is it about the situation there and our relationship with Saudi Arabia that causes so many of al-Qaeda to hail from that allied country?
Craig Whitlock: Actually, as far as I can tell, there are hardly any Saudis left in the AQ central command, other than bin Laden. His son Saad was seen as a potential up-and-comer, but is apparently under house arrest in Iran. Another one of Osama's sons, Hamza, is said to be in Pakistan. There are some important Saudi financiers in the network, but the inner circle remains dominated by Egyptians -- led by Ayman al Zawahiri -- and by Libyans, to a lesser extent.
_______________________
Ottawa, Canada: If on Sept. 12, 2001, I had been told that Osama bin Laden still would be alive and releasing video tapes in September 2007, I would have thought them to be insane. Is the ill-advised war in Iraq the only reason that Osama and his fellow murderers are still on the loose, or is there some other reason?
Craig Whitlock: I agree with your first statement. I still find it incredible that bin Laden is alive and free six years later, given the unprecedented global hunt for him. I understand all the reasons that are given for this -- the impenetrability of Pakistan's tribal areas, the willingness of the locals and the Taliban to shelter him -- but it's still hard to imagine. Then again, recall that it took three years to kill Abu Musab al Zarqawi in Iraq, despite the presence of 150,000 U.S. troops there.
_______________________
MidEastWeb: Al-Qaeda will continue to rise, phoenix-like from the ashes, as long as the U.S. continues to view it as an isolated problem -- a specific enemy that must only be contained by police action or beaten by military confrontation. What is the point of beating Osama bin Laden in Afghanistan, when the madrasahs of the Middle East and East Asia are turning out a few dozen replacements each year?
Craig Whitlock: You're right: Eliminating al-Qaeda won't solve the broader problems. But tactically speaking, I think apprehending bin Laden, Zawahiri and the top leadership would have an enormous effect. Those two are the only ones so far who have been able to unite so many regional militant groups under one banner. Without those two, I think, the global movement would devolve quickly into factionalism and infighting.
_______________________
Detroit: Do you have any sense as to whether we could have captured bin Laden in the past six years? It is now six years since Sept. 2001: the length of World War II. I think the Bush administration's inability to capture him will go down in history as its biggest failure.
Craig Whitlock: There was a chance to catch him at Tora Bora in December 2001. After that, I think the chances largely dried up.
_______________________
Harrisburg, Pa.: You are in Berlin. What do people you meet on the streets think of our presence of troops in Iraq? What are their thought on the international fight against terrorism?
Craig Whitlock: Well, put it this way: I've lived in Germany for more than three years. So far, I've met two people here who supported the idea of U.S. troops in Iraq. One was a German military officer, the other was an Iranian cab driver who was exiled from his country years ago. So the U.S. mission there isn't popular here, to say the least.
_______________________
Craig Whitlock: Thanks everyone for the questions and for taking the time to tune in.
_______________________
Editor's Note: washingtonpost.com moderators retain editorial control over Discussions and choose the most relevant questions for guests and hosts; guests and hosts can decline to answer questions. washingtonpost.com is not responsible for any content posted by third parties.
View all comments that have been posted about this article.