When There Is No Number 3, Than They Are All Number 3

I recently had an epiphany as to why some if not many in the US intelligence community and most of the media can not get it through their thick heads even the basic structure of Al-Qaeda.

After all within 24 hours not only was Hamza Rabia, whose claim to fame is being an associate of Zawahiri and the previously unknown who was elevated by the Pakistan in the person of Al-Libby, been elevated to number 5 in the organization but has apparently also received another promotion to the rank of number 3. Some how this unknown who has for at least the last year been in an operational backwater for Al-Qaeda, though Pakistan still serves as a key training area, shot past even the well-known Zarqawi in rank. This despite the fact that Zarqawi is in charge of the main battle field of Iraq, and heads the organization within Al-Qaeda that is in charge of attacking Europe and North America (the two most important target outside of the muslim world). He even surpassed the actual number 3 Saif Al-Adel who even Zarqawi answers to and who with Zarqawi is the architect of the Iraq strategy. There is also the minor thing that after Khalid Sheikh Mohammed was captured Al-Adel was elevated to the number three position and he has never been arrested or killed since then.

So why is the US seemingly blind. Well part is the investment that certain agencies have in their relationship to Pakistan and the ISI. This is made even worse by the fact that the primary water carriers of the Pakistan/ISI banner within the interagency groups is desperately looking to maintain their relevance after several spectacular intelligence failures and a virtual demotion of their role. Throw in the reality that most of the US government either through ignorance or fear of the Pandora’s Box it might open, maintain a strategic blind spot when it comes to Iran.

Because of this and such stories as this item from an Australian newspaper from May 2003 which despite properly identifying Al-Adel as the successor to KSM, goes on to report that Al-Adel was “seized in Iran” as though that actually matters. You see interestingly what it leaves out is the from around Dec 2001/Jan2002 until even today Al-Adel has lived and worked under the protection of the Iranian Régime and its powerful IRGC. This has allowed him to continue to operate out of the reach of an America that seems to be afraid of actually coming to grips with our Iran problem. Throw in garbage reports such as this more recent and ridicules AFP Article, which reports the Iranian government's claims that Iran is clean of foreign terrorists. (Ironically the AFP was one of the source news agencies behind much of the misinformation by that Pakistan and the CIA about Al-Libby. Maybe the French are just too gulible that they will report anything :). ) Suddenly you have the assumption that Al-Adel was truly captured and that he is not running Al-Qaeda operations out of Iran, which he has and continues to do, therefore you need a new person to elevate to that position. After all Iran would never lie about something concerning terrorism right? This fits perfectly in line with a number of senior government officials whose positions in this administration escape any rhyme or reason. Two examples in particular include:

Suzanne Maloney – One of the authors, although she was likely the sole author, of Council on Foreign Relations “Iran Time for a New Approach” which is one of the worst appeasement documents in history closely rivaling Chamberlain agreement from Munich. Her philosophy is even further illustrated by a Briefing item she authored for the Brookings Institute entitled “America and Iran: From Containment to Coexistence”. She is currently on the State Departments Policy Planning Staff where she oversees that Departments Iran policy.

Meghan O'Sullivan – Is another example, of the wrong person at a high position. Not only did she occupy the same position that Ms. Maloney currently holds but they both have ties to the Brookings Institute and the Council on Foreign Relations. Two organizations that have a long track record of appeasement and idealist world views. An excellent column was written about her recent promotion at the National Security Council to the level of Deputy National Security Adviser for Iraq and Afghanistan. Rather than rehearsing the excellent points made in that I would just refer you to “A dubious NSC choice” by Joel Mowbray.

Until we have a government that backs its rhetoric with people who both understand realistically and have a willingness to address the actual issue of terrorism such as Iran (which even the State Department admits it is the “most active state sponsor of terrorism” and Al-Qaeda which has far more extensive ties to Iran than anyone seems prepared to admit) than we have no chance for victory. In fact, if anything it ensures our defeat. After all, if we ignore that most of Al-Qaeda’s senior leadership has been in Iran for now almost 4 years where they continue to operate with the assistance of that régime how can we ever win, or actually even understand the structure of Al-Qaeda, which our ignorance of allows the Pakistani government to “wag the dog” of the USG.

[FYI – When I say wag the dog I am referring to the original joke not the movie - "Why does a dog wag its tail? Because a dog is smarter than its tail. If the tail was smarter, the tail would wag the do"]