Washington toward al-Qaida:Contradictory Positions
Published in Ahram
(Egypt) on 9 August 2013
by Makram Mohamed Ahmed (link to original)
(Egypt) on 9 August 2013
by Makram Mohamed Ahmed (link to original)
Translated from
by Daniel Grafton.
Edited by Brent Landon.
The U.S. administration caused exasperation around the world and especially in the Middle East by closing 22 of its embassies and consulates in nearly every country in the region. President Obama issued the directive for closures after he had met with the directors of U.S. intelligence agencies, which had information indicating a high likelihood of a large al-Qaida attack against western and U.S. targets in North Africa, an attack comparative in size to the attacks of 9/11.
Adding to the threat of the U.S. alert, statements issued a few days ago by al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, accusing Washington of engineering the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi, accompanied the warnings. Also coinciding with the alert were Washington's mediation efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement to the crisis between the Muslim Brotherhood and the government in Egypt. These mediation efforts were meant to guarantee a halt to the violence and the return of the Muslim Brotherhood into the political fold in Egypt.
What is curious about the American position is that the warnings Obama issued of al-Qaida conducting a large scale operation in any one of the North African countries in the beginning of August, and perhaps before Eid al-Fitr, were not accompanied by any sincere interest in the role al-Qaida has been playing in the Sinai. The ousted president had granted all kinds of aid to the jihadi Salafist groups (simply a new name for al-Qaida) that had allowed them to take root there.
The U.S. did not ask the ousted president or the Muslim Brotherhood about this loathsome alliance between an organization that presents itself to the world as a moderate group and al-Qaida, which the U.S. considers its greatest threat and views as an eternal enemy that needs to be fought. Unfortunately, the framework for U.S. mediations between the Muslim Brotherhood and the transitional government in Egypt contains nothing that would require the Muslim Brotherhood to renounce its alliance with al-Qaida. More perilous even, is the fact that U.S. envoy William Burns has not spoken once about the threat of al-Qaida operations in the Sinai to Egyptian security and the stability of every Arab country; nor has he commented on the efforts of the Egyptian forces in pursuing these organizations in the Sinai, where they have made a great deal of progress.
To me, these contradictory standpoints and the indifference to the danger posed by al-Qaida’s presence in the Sinai are puzzling. It is imperative that the U.S. administration divulge all of its secrets if it wants its benevolent mediation efforts in Egypt to become an important factor in the stability of the Middle East.
Adding to the threat of the U.S. alert, statements issued a few days ago by al-Qaida leader Ayman al-Zawahiri, accusing Washington of engineering the ouster of the Muslim Brotherhood and Egypt’s President Mohamed Morsi, accompanied the warnings. Also coinciding with the alert were Washington's mediation efforts to bring about a peaceful settlement to the crisis between the Muslim Brotherhood and the government in Egypt. These mediation efforts were meant to guarantee a halt to the violence and the return of the Muslim Brotherhood into the political fold in Egypt.
What is curious about the American position is that the warnings Obama issued of al-Qaida conducting a large scale operation in any one of the North African countries in the beginning of August, and perhaps before Eid al-Fitr, were not accompanied by any sincere interest in the role al-Qaida has been playing in the Sinai. The ousted president had granted all kinds of aid to the jihadi Salafist groups (simply a new name for al-Qaida) that had allowed them to take root there.
The U.S. did not ask the ousted president or the Muslim Brotherhood about this loathsome alliance between an organization that presents itself to the world as a moderate group and al-Qaida, which the U.S. considers its greatest threat and views as an eternal enemy that needs to be fought. Unfortunately, the framework for U.S. mediations between the Muslim Brotherhood and the transitional government in Egypt contains nothing that would require the Muslim Brotherhood to renounce its alliance with al-Qaida. More perilous even, is the fact that U.S. envoy William Burns has not spoken once about the threat of al-Qaida operations in the Sinai to Egyptian security and the stability of every Arab country; nor has he commented on the efforts of the Egyptian forces in pursuing these organizations in the Sinai, where they have made a great deal of progress.
To me, these contradictory standpoints and the indifference to the danger posed by al-Qaida’s presence in the Sinai are puzzling. It is imperative that the U.S. administration divulge all of its secrets if it wants its benevolent mediation efforts in Egypt to become an important factor in the stability of the Middle East.