Getting Libya's Rebels Wrong

Don't buy Qaddafi's line: The rebels aren't al Qaeda.

BY NAJLA ABDURRAHMAN | MARCH 31, 2011

In 2005, Saif al-Islam Qaddafi, leader Muammar's son, proposed a dialogue between the regime and the imprisoned LIFG membership, which numbered in the hundreds. He approached Benotman, who had been out of the country when the LIFG was discovered and had since settled in London; Benotman agreed to act as a liaison between the government and the prisoners beginning in January 2007.

The result of this dialogue was the release in September 2009 of a 400-page document titled Corrective Studies in Understanding Jihad, Accountability and the Judgment of People. The study -- authored by imprisoned senior LIFG members and intellectuals Abd al-Hakim Balhaj, Abu al-Mundhir al-Saidi, Abd al-Wahab al-Qayed, Khalid al-Sharif, Miftah al-Duwdi, and Mustafa Qanaifid -- analyzes various concepts related to jihad and Islamic law in an effort to delegitimize the use of armed struggle to overthrow the regimes of Muslim states. The LIFG recantation made headlines throughout the Arab world, and several prominent Muslim clerics, including Yusuf al-Qaradawi, praised the study. Even the Western media took notice. Others doubted the sincerity of the recantation, arguing that it was coerced or done simply to secure prisoner releases.

As the West's darling in Libya -- a country that over the last decade had actively sought to burnish its image on the international stage -- Saif al-Islam was able to manipulate the story of the LIFG in order to make the claim that the Qaddafi regime had succeeded not only in thwarting al Qaeda in Libya, but in rehabilitating it to boot. In reality, this was little more than a PR stunt designed to bolster Qaddafi's image as an effective hedge against terrorism, an ironic proposition given his past involvement in terrorist activities.

Although the LIFG had advocated the use of force against the regime, its former leaders have been quick to distinguish their group from radical organizations like al Qaeda, despite having trained in some of the same camps in Afghanistan and Sudan in the 1980s and 1990s. They point out that the LIFG never advocated the use of violence against Libyan or non-Libyan civilians, never participated in al Qaeda attacks, and had no interest in waging war on either Libyan society or the West -- its target had been Qaddafi and Qaddafi alone. The LIFG never joined al Qaeda; in fact, LIFG leaders like Benotman have publicly denounced the organization's use of indiscriminate violence and have in the past actively sought to distance themselves from the group, objecting vehemently to statements by al Qaeda's No. 2, Ayman al-Zawahiri, that the two groups had merged.

Despite the LIFG's repudiation of al Qaeda, the latter did manage to infiltrate Libyan society in other, limited ways. In 2008, Newsweek reported the discovery of documents in northern Iraq suggesting that out of 606 al Qaeda militants listed, 112 had come from Libya. More striking was the fact that nearly half of these were from Darnah, a city of 50,000 known even among Libya's neglected eastern regions for having suffered considerably under Qaddafi's tenure. Even more troubling was the fact that many of these young men appeared to have volunteered for suicide missions.

It seems that though Qaddafi was successful in crushing his own internal opposition, he made little effort to stanch the trickle of would-be militants out of the country. Not only did the regime fail to prevent al Qaeda recruiters from preying on disillusioned young men, but it also arguably contributed to the problem by fueling the discontent and hopelessness endemic to Libyan society, where unemployment hovers around 30 percent and a deceptively high GDP belies the reality that most of the country's oil wealth has not trickled down to the average citizen.

Why would young Libyans decide to abandon their homes and their families to kill and be killed in a foreign country? The reasons are complex, varied, and tragic, but there is little doubt that a deep sense of despair stemming from a lifetime of repression and lack of economic opportunity played a significant role. Although 112 individuals in a country of 6.5 million represents a negligible proportion of the population, the recruitment of young men by al Qaeda is nevertheless a source of grave concern among Libyans, just as it is for Europe, the United States, and other countries that have grappled with similar problems.

Although Libya is in some ways a traditional society, al Qaeda remains deeply unpopular among its people, many of whom have been keen to stress that this uprising is in no way connected to the terrorist organization. Indeed, they have repeatedly scoffed at Qaddafi's absurd accusations to the contrary. The Libyan revolution is a decidedly nationalist, democratic movement, two characteristics that render it fatally incompatible with al Qaeda's delusional goal of resurrecting a pan-Islamic caliphate; the Libyan people have no intention of allowing their movement to be hijacked by al Qaeda. That a handful of rebel fighters may have a history with the LIFG does not mean that the Transitional National Council or the pro-democracy fighters are connected to al Qaeda, yet this is precisely what the Qaddafi regime would have the international community believe. Indeed, the council just released a statement refuting allegations aimed at associating al Qaeda with the revolutionists in Libya, and affirming its commitment to combating terrorism and implementing Security Council resolutions on counterterrorism.

After his remark about "flickers" of al Qaeda, Stavridis admitted that he lacked "the detail sufficient to say that there's a significant al Qaeda presence or any other terrorist presence in and among these folks." But the absence of evidence cannot be passed off as the presence of information. Ambiguous and misleading statements like the admiral's do a grave disservice to the Libyan people and their cause by effectively and unfairly lumping them together with al Qaeda in the public consciousness; they also do a disservice to those who seek a better understanding of Libya and its people. Libyans have already had to contend with the Qaddafi regime's ridiculous allegations that their movement is nothing more than an al Qaeda plot fueled by widespread hallucinogenic drug use -- let's not join him in denigrating their cause.

ARIS MESSINIS/AFP/Getty Images

 

Najla Abdurrahman, a Libyan-American writer and activist, is a doctoral student in Columbia University's Department of Middle Eastern, South, Asian, and African Studies. She lives in New York City.

COMMONSENSEFP

9:52 AM ET

April 1, 2011

So wait, I missed the part

So wait, I missed the part where the author refuted the point that Eastern Libyans played a significant role in AQ in Iraq as she said she intended to do? Also the long held and still common argument that poverty and such causes people to join revolutionary and terrorist groups is wanting of proof; in fact, nearly all evidence points to the opposite.

Overall all though I think the fear that AQ will hijack Libya movement is stupid (though I'd like to see them leave Pakistan and go to Libya to get gunned down by Qaddafi). Most likely the opposition will just either be put down by the regime or overthrow Qaddafi and then begin the real civil war between themselves.

 

WESTERNSKEPTIC

5:30 PM ET

April 1, 2011

Wait, what?

It's funny, I don't remember the last time a revolutionary group was composed of affluent and free individuals. I don't know where you get "nearly all [your] evidence" that poverty and oppression doesn't facilitate violence when when the population is pushed far enough, but I'd sure like to see it.

As for the author's argument, there's a fallacy in the argument that Al Quaeda is not a threat. The author uses statements from the de facto Benghazi administration citing their distaste for Al Quaeda. That merely proves that the rebel leadership is not aligned with Al Quaeda, it does not disprove the threat. Considering that Al Quaeda and Hezbollah have transnational ambitions, it would not be surprising that both groups would have some people on the ground looking to further their cause. It is also likely that these groups would have, or at least have attempted to, infiltrate the rebels in order to gather intel or attempt to shape Lybia's post-revolutionary landscape.

The analysis in this article seems rather simplistic for such a complex problem. It seems to imply that Al Quaeda can only be a threat if they and the rebels are on the same side. The Lybian rebels are united only in their distaste for Gaddafi, so it shouldn't surprise anyone that groups such as Hezbollah or AQ would seek to prepare for a power vacuum should the Gaddafi regime fall.

So really, in this context, Al Quaeda is even more of a threat than if they were with the rebels. That would mean that supporting the Gaddafi regime would stifle the AQ threat. However, AQ is a threat to both sides in this scenario, which means that unless the West decides to commit some security forces to assist a transitional government, the new administration will have a big security problem on their hands.

Considering the rebel leadership can't even control it's own fighters' rampant waste of limited ammunition, it will have a hell of a wake-up call fighting a sophisticated enemy like AQ or Hezbollah. Let's not be too quick to dismiss legitimate concerns or threats in the name of political correctness, or to make a policy decision more appealing politically.

 

FFDGFHGFH

10:22 AM ET

April 1, 2011

accept paypal free shipping

Wonderful.

Share a website with you ,

(======= http://mcaf.ee/6e4ac =======)

Believe you will love it.

accept paypal free shipping

 

SUBVERSIVEMIKE

11:43 AM ET

April 1, 2011

Uh, you are forgetting...

That "Abdel-Hakim al-Hasidi, the Libyan rebel leader, has said jihadists who fought against allied troops in Iraq are on the front lines of the battle against Muammar Gaddafi's regime."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8407047/Libyan-rebel-commander-admits-his-fighters-have-al-Qaeda-links.html

Is NAJLA ABDURRAHMAN running interference for the U.S. via Foreign Policy?

- mike

 

MARTY24

1:16 PM ET

April 1, 2011

Opposition Leaders

Let's first see who the actual leaders of the Libyan opposition are, then let's talk about what we do next.

 

NEWTOSCHOOL

3:00 PM ET

April 1, 2011

I agree...

While MARTY24's sentiment seems to have been tossed back-and-forth in the political figureheads that are talking about the issue, I'm wondering why this wasn't done prior to us becoming involved in the first place.

I understand that there are situations that call for immediate action, but this one didn't seem to rise to that level: A government attempting to seize-back power from a relatively unknown rebel force (that early on took 5 of its countries major cities). The mainstream media here in the US failed to talk at any length about who these rebels were (except for referring to them continually as "civilians") or even their accomplishments (of how they were able to take the 5 cities in the first place) or what (besides "freedom", is their ultimate goal).

In all, the public is left with very little to make an informed opinion on the matter. We have the history of Qaddafi to figure out what side of the fence we will end up on. While I cringe at alligning myself with him, until I have another choice, I am very reluctant at jumping in with someone else (especially in the Middle East). Every piece of footage I see from the battles in Libya, I hear the Rebels yelling "Allahu Akbar (and yes I know it literally means God is Great" and acting in the same manner they do when they are attacking US and Coalition forces in Iraq and Afganistan.

It is unsettling to me how fast we have backed a movement so quickly with so little research

 

JLMWILLIAMS

9:55 PM ET

April 1, 2011

Ultimately I read this article

as recognition that what's omitted or blurred in other biased, fear mongering reporting, is the fact that the Libyan people are fighting for democracy. Under an oppressive regime, it's possible for some "one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter" - but not for all.

"Ambiguous and misleading statements like the admiral's do a grave disservice to the Libyan people and their cause by effectively and unfairly lumping them together with al Qaeda in the public consciousness." Abdurrahman, N.

Thank you Abdurrahman and Foreign Policy for attempting to drive this point home.

 

KUMHO

2:50 AM ET

April 12, 2011

Kumho

Libyan opposition are, then let's talk about what we do next.Parça Kontör

 

ZEVZECI

10:40 AM ET

April 12, 2011

Libya

So really, in this context, Al Quaeda is even more of a threat than if they were with the rebels. That would mean that supporting the Gaddafi regime would stifle the AQ threat. However, AQ is a threat to both sides in this scenario, which means that unless the West decides to commit some zevze security forces to assist a transitional government, the new administration will have a big security problem on their hands.