Armies of Liberation

Comment by Trey Campbell

1/30/2008 @ 12:01 pm

I agree, and respectfully disagree. OF course I believe there are very real security concerns regarding the jihadists threat to Condi, brought on in part by the Yemeni government’s relationship with them. However, Sana’a’s relationship with jihadists has not changed…it has always been that way, and it would be silly to think the US didn’t know it when Yemen was selected for a conference site. Two things have changed, however: 1. The emmergence of a new generation of AQ that does not abide by the regimes former containment policies - the government, nor the jihadists working with the government have a relationship with this cell - the al Wasat article says as much. And 2. The mass civil unrest at the moment - both anti-government and anti-America…it’s a serious PR firestorm I can’t imagine anyone would want to walk into. In past times, perhaps Saleh could control it, or wouldn’t need to…but now, he can’t and won’t.

Comment by Jane Novak

1/30/2008 @ 12:08 pm

Nothing I love more than intelligent disagreement, Trey. Do you really think the US understood fully the relationship when they scheduled the conference, or that it became more clear after the release of al-Badawi? The release says as much about the US/Yemeni relationship as it does the Saleh/al-Qaeda relationship.

The Southern protesters would probably have signs for Condi saying, “Please Invade” and “Where is Democracy in Yemen?”

The US officials go all the time to locations with massive anti-US rallies and high threat of al-Qaeda. The cancelling of the Forum seems mostly a punative snub relating to al-Badawi.

Im still thinking about the new generation.

Comment by Trey Campbell

1/30/2008 @ 2:09 pm

Understand fully, no, but if they didn’t understand something was going on, they hadn’t been paying enough attention to you;)

But seriously, the first Forum for the Future was held when - December 2004? hmmm…

October, 2000 - USS Cole - Yemen reportedly obstructs investigation.

Fall, 2002 - al Hitar starts his “dialogue” program…releases follow

January, 2003 - al Moayad arrested in Germany.

April 2003, al Badawi escapes the first time.

Summer 2004, Al Houthi rebellion breaks out, Yemen employs Afghani jihadists.

Not to mention the long history of use of Afghans against the socialist prior to the Cole bombing.

Even if they didn’t know in 2004, by March, 2005, you had it all outlined for them. How ’bout Jihadist Airlines flights to Jordan and Syria.

I hardly believe that Yemen’s release of al Badawi last year came as a shocker. If it was any other takfiri without American blood on his hands he would have slipped quietly back to his village…look at al Nabi, I didn’t see Johndroe releasing statements then. Not to mention the escapees that “surrendered”…are we so nieve to believe they just gave themselves up without the pro quo?

I think they knew, but the al badawi incident was too hot to handle - they drew the line there. Its totally understandable that they punitivly postponed in December - they were pissed. But as far as the relationship between the government and AQ somehow changing, or them becoming more aware of it…noway.

As for the protesters, I just see Seche sittin out in his compound thinking “God, please don’t come.” I agree its totally possible to hold a conference despite protesters - although its more difficult when a highlevel official like Condi is involved - but whats the point…In this case is it really worth it? Especially since State is pissed at Sana’a anyway. The US is trying to fill the Arab news cycles with specific issues right now, and al Moayad, Guantanamo and hungry Palestinians sitting in the dark is not any one of them.

As for the southern protesters, as far as I’ve seen, the US government has yet to make any meaningful statement on the southern successionist movement, at least none that I’ve seen. Why force the issue? Is she supposed to show up and ignore it?

Comment by Trey Campbell

1/30/2008 @ 2:29 pm

Oh and don’t forget we have Nashiri…like he didn’t spill the beans.

Comment by Jane Novak

1/30/2008 @ 3:25 pm

So what your saying is: its all a game of you pretend you’re reforming and we’ll pretend to be pleased. You catch ‘em and we’ll hope you give us a heads up when you release ‘em. That’s pathetic. There has to be another option for the US.

Trey, the last attack on the tourists stinks somehow. There’s a lot of things that don’t add up, including that the younger AQ who are rejecting negotiating for the release of prisoners are in essence negotiating for the release of prisoners. This is their issue in the magazine and in the al-Wasat article. If they are who they say they are, then the attack was extremely mild compared to their capacity. I’m sorry for the two dead women, but AQiY can do much worse damage. Look at what they do operationally in Iraq, much more sophisticated tactics than spraying a car with bullets. Do you think it was a different branch that smuggled the nine Chinese missiles to Saudi Arabia? If they really wanted to hurt Saleh, it wouldn’t be the tourists they would target. That’s a publicity grabber, and generates sympathy for him, but it wont have a big impact on the economy since the industry is infantile. I find it hard to take anything in Yemen at face value including al-Qaeda statements.

Comment by Trey Campbell

2/1/2008 @ 1:05 am

well, I wouldn’t put it exactly that way. I think its I realistic understanding that when it comes to jihadist, Yemens interests and US interests aren’t always the same. Despite what George might want, its a little more complicated than “with us or against us.”

As for the shooting, that has been bugging me too. Why would they pull off a spectacular operation like the spaniards bombing, and then follow it up with a such an unsophisticated attack. This thing might as well have been carried out by a gabili with a grudge. It definately seems like the Belgians were a target of opportunity. I can’t think of a similar attack… I know there were some similar shootings in KSA, but not in Yemen. The only thing comparable is the missionary hospital in 2002. The lesson - the guy who did that was acting alone.

Comment by Trey Campbell

2/1/2008 @ 1:49 am

I also agree that attacks against tourists is not done for finiancial motive…the vast majority of yemen tourism is Arab. This is actually one of the strongest arguments for a new AQ in Yemen. The difference between AQ-Mess and AQ-Prime is that UBL Always has an agenda…as sick as it sounds his actions are rational given what wants to accomplish. zarqawi, on the other hand, just likes to blow sh*t up and take off heads just for the hell of it…even when it hurts the overall AQ agenda. These tourist attacks seem Zarqawish.
As I pointed out on my site, I also find it shady that the responsibilty claim was phoned in, while the threat was published on the web. Maybe who ever did this was so low-level they didn’t have admin privileges on the AQ website. We know that al wahayshi has no problems getting stuff out on the net…just an observation.

Comment by Jane Novak

2/1/2008 @ 9:11 am

What if bin Laden’s agenda is keeping Saleh in power and in the good graces of the west?

Just throwing it out there as a possibility to be toyed with.

I know it sounds bizarre, and Im still just musing, but it does unify all three attacks.