Austin Bay Blog

This is the fourth post in this series. Follow this link to the previous post on the document analyzing the failed jihad in Syria.

Al Qaeda’s “Letter Three: Five letters to the Africa Corps” is a collection of letters discussing Al Qaeda’s interpretation of America’s withdrawal from Somalia. (“Africa Corps” refers to Al Qaeda cells in Africa.) The later letters also delve into central Asia and the Caucasus region.

The letters were translated in June 2002.

Bu thet first and foremost subject is Somalia. Letter Three asks this question about Somalia: ““So how were our amazing Corps and its starving African Muslim allies able to be victorious over the greatest power in the world today?” The answer (he suggests) lies in the power of God, because “When we are truly fighting in the name and on behalf of God, we have nothing to fear…” (from page 21 pdf version, page 12 of translated letter).

For those who want to read the particular text for themselves, I have tried to plug in page numbers from the pdf version — the translation includes original letter page numbers as well. The original page numbers can get confusing.

An excerpt from page three (pdf) provides a feel for the letter’s rhetoric. It also outlines military and political goals.

Maneuvering in the political arena is more dangerous, more urgent, and
more essential than maneuvering in military operations. Can you conceive
of military action without maneuvering or proceeding according to a phased
plan? Jihad action in the manner of a rhinoceros is stupid and futile. By
this I mean jihad action that only considers military action, nothing else.
When you entered Somalia, the Somali arena was barren and futile. The
situation changed, however, after the intervention by America and the
Knights of the Cross. You most resembled a hunter aiming his rifle at the
dead branch of a tree, with no leaves or birds on it. Suddenly, a bald eagle
lands on the branch of the tree, directly in line with the rifle. Shouldn’t the
hunter pull the trigger to kill the eagle or at least bloody it?

The letter writer sees the current world through a medieval lens. His “Christian” enemies are all “Byzantines”:

The Byzantines will always
be Byzantines; their punishment is near. This punishment will be by our
hands where you are, where we are, and everywhere, God willing.

An excerpt recommending what operations to conduct in Somalia:

the following solutions
can be envisioned:
1. Political and military cooperation among all Somali groups opposed to
the international occupation of their country and the formation of a
national Islamic front to that end.
2. Formation of a temporary government for the country with an agenda
containing:
A. Expulsion of the foreign international presence.
B. Rebuilding of state institutions.
C. Establishment of domestic security.
D. Comprehensive national reconciliation.
E. Economic reform and combating famine.
3. An urgent military program. It would be best that it come from the
National Grouping and be based on a division of responsibilities for
military action throughout the entire country. A security-defensive
strategy needs to be outlined that includes:
A. Resistance to foreign presence and action to force it to withdraw.
B. Supervision of liberated areas and securing the lives, funds, and
property of all members of the populace.
Each group would carry out its assignment under this program within its
geographical area. This would be temporary until a unified defense force
could be established.
It is only natural that the Muslims will be unable to come to terms over a
unified program. How much more difficult it will be if the program is a
comprehensive one. It will be useful, therefore, to set forth a program of
action for the forces available to you and a political, military, and economic
program. Based on what we hear about operations in Mogadishu, it is clear
that those carrying them out are fully knowledgeable about the technical
aspects of the action. The political effort is clearly there and effective.
Likewise, the military effort is simple, effective, and inexpensive.

The third letter in this group is the most striking– and if you have to choose, the one worth reading in its entirety. It begins on page 19 of the document.

The writer says of Somalia:

Somalia
I would have liked to write on this subject unemotionally and somewhat
objectively, were in not for my overwhelming desire to kiss the heads and
hands of all those who took part in this action. Dear ones, this is a splendid
victory and a unique experience that deserves recording, evaluation,
derivation of lessons, and determination of courses of future action in light
of its results. But was that what we did in Afghanistan, which was more
profound, more comprehensive, and more critical? This was one of our
major shortcomings, and how many they were!
I was not there for the experience, and I’m sorry to say I did not take part,
but monitored it from a distance.

He offers these general observations (page 12 of text, page 21 in pdf version). I added the emphasis around his comment about President Clinton.:

General observations on the operation:
1. The Africa Corps did not enter the Somali arena with a clear vision,
specifically a strategic vision, either militarily or politically.
2. Likewise, Americans did not enter the Somali arena with a clear vision
of the objectives of its presence. Moreover, its vision of East Africa and
the Horn of Africa failed to crystallize. I believe that the buffoon
Clinton was motivated by election considerations and a personal
inclination toward flamboyance, as if for a fleeting moment he believed
the falsehood that he was the leader of the most powerful country in the
world.
These are not just my words. Rather, this is the considered opinion of many
inside America and abroad. What was the result? The result was that our
amazing Corps was equal to America for the first time, but in a limited area
—the area of darkness regarding a strategic vision. So how were our
amazing Corps and its starving African Muslim allies able to be victorious
over the greatest power in the world today?

He expands on “on we did it” (to the Americans):

The Somali experience confirmed the spurious nature of American
power and that it has not recovered from the Vietnam complex. It fears
getting bogged down in a real war that would reveal its psychological
collapse at the level of personnel and leadership. Since Vietnam
America has been seeking easy battles that are completely guaranteed. It
entered into a shameful series of adventures on the island of Grenada,
then Panama, then bombing Libya, and then the Gulf War farce, which
was the greatest military, political, and ideological swindle in history.
The outcomes were 100 percent guaranteed. Even so, the Americans
brought with them forces from 30 countries to take the blows on their
behalf, should events not turn out the way they were supposed to. In the
end, the Arabs, the Europeans, and Japan paid the costs of the war, plus
fees!
America wanted to continue this series of farces. It assumed that Somalia
was an appropriate space for another ridiculous act. But the Muslims were
there—so the great disaster occurred. They fled in panic before their true
capabilities could be exposed.
6. In Mogadishu and Beirut, urban deterrence operations caused the
American forces to flee in a shameful and humiliating manner. Doesn’t
this demonstrate the importance of this type of warfare and the need to
develop our warfare capabilities in terms of personnel, training syllabi,
equipment being used, its level of technological advancement,
development of security syllabi, development of security procedures, and
training of competent elements for the security field.
On the subject of security, it should be noted that the enemy’s greatest effort
to pursue and eliminate Islamic action has become so dependent on his
security agencies that the military apparatus is gradually being transformed
into something resembling advanced Central Security…

He’s also a strategist, advocating “action on the flanks” — but sees his world encircled:

The Somali operation confirmed an important and correct military principle
at the tactical and strategic levels, which is the sensitivity and critical nature
of action on the flanks. Most battles, if not all, are won or lost in operations
on the adversary’s flanks. If we go back to the beginning of the Crusader
wars, the reasons for their failure are that they tried to strike at the centers of
Islam in Syria, Egypt, and the Arabian Peninsula. However when they
began via what were called “geographical discoveries” to encircle the
Islamic world with military centers on its periphery, then brought under
control the international waterways, then began lopping off the remote parts
piece by piece, they succeeded in finally reaching the heartland. They now
fully control it, including the religious sanctuaries in the Peninsula and
Palestine.

He goes on to discuss Asian Corps (Al Qaeda in Asia) and emphasize that cells must have tactical flexibility. On page 30 (of the pdf document) he returns to “action on the flanks” from a strategic perspective. His statement:

They bring about jihad action having a unified strategic vision on two
geopolitically critical flanks: a) the eastern flank of the Islamic world in
central Asia, and b) the southern flank of the Arab world.
Both flanks are distinctive for being relatively relaxed, capable of deep
penetration, and providing scope for jihad and armed opposition
unanticipated by the adversary yet able to greatly affect his balance and
cohesiveness. Moreover, such action constitutes application of the indirect
approach strategy that is more appropriate for us in our current situation.
The ultimate goal is to bring about conditions that will lead to reconquest of
the Arab region through simultaneous external and internal jihad action.

Another interesting quote (page 18 of text, page 33 of pdf): “Jihad radio stations operating in Yemen and Somalia will have a more powerful effect on them than nuclear bombs.”

That is, they have more effect on motivating “youths” to undertake martyrdom operations.

The writer believes Somalia is a“splendid victory” with “profound implications ideologically, politically, and psychologically.” Al Qaeda’s writer adds: “The Somali experience confirmed the spurious nature of American power and that it has not recovered from the Vietnam complex. It fears getting bogged down in a real war that would reveal its psychological collapse at the level of personnel and leader.”

His conclusion: “When the enemy abandons the battleground, he must not be allowed to flee. He must be pursued from one position to the next until rooted out.”

In Al Qaeda’s context, 9/11 was “pursuit” of its American enemy—the one that fled Somalia.

The fourth letter (”The Fourth Letter about Jihad in the Caucasus”) is found on page 49 of the pdf, page 27 of the original document.

From page 59 of the pdf:

On the first issue, it is well-known that America wants to encircle central
Asia with an iron fence of secular governments hostile to Islam in Turkey,
Iran, and Pakistan. It has been completely successful in the first and the
third, but in the second—Iran—more time is needed in order to exchange
the regime there for a purely western government or to split Iran into a
series of small states.
America’s objective in the project to blockade central Asia is to weaken the
Islamic spirit and isolate it from the impact of Afghanistan, which goes well
beyond juridical purity. The type of Islam America is pushing in central
Asia is the Islam of al-Azhar [TC: University in Cairo and center of Islamic
orthodoxy for 1000 years] and Saudi Islam. Iranian Islam, on the other
hand, is deemed undesirable by America except for the extent to which it
causes confusion, turmoil, and perhaps even fighting within developing and
weak Islamic ranks.

The fifth letter of this batch beginson page 62 of the pdf. The subject is initially Chechnya, but the writer offers his “world view.” The following extended excerpt is found at the beginning of this letter:

As this report is being written, the battles for Grozny, the Chechen capital,
are taking place, recording a new fight on behalf of the Islamic awakening
at the end of this century and offering the promise that the coming century is
certain to be the century of Islam.
Ever since Afghanistan, and perhaps under the impact of that fight, Islamic
battles and signs of a jihad renaissance have appeared successively in
prominent locations, the most important being Algeria in the Arab world,
Palestine, Somalia, and Yemen. Each brings with it undeniably new
characteristics and progress in the level of jihad action.
Here I will now take a quick look at what is happening in Chechnya in order
to point out the areas of assistance available to us to reinforce the jihad of
that Muslim people. It is essential that we spotlight the international and
regional situation surrounding that struggle before discussing our role there.
First: The International Situation
The Soviet empire collapsed as a direct result of the war in Afghanistan,
leaving the United States in control as the number one power overseeing
world affairs. The U.S. tries to run the world in an autocratic manner by
assigning absolute priority to its interests, followed by the interests of its
allies in the West and then its Asian satellites, Japan in particular.
The cracks in the ranks of this fragile alliance are increasing with time.
Warfare is an absolute certainty in the nature of the makeup of the
capitalistic system. It cannot be avoided. Within one or two decades the
nuclear weapon that in the past prevented a clash between the superpowers,
while proxy wars became a way acceptable to them, will be a people’s
weapon. History will take new course when that happens. One researcher
summarized the situation within the American-led alliance of the major
powers as follows: “America against everyone; and everyone against the
Muslims.” This statement is absolutely true. We have to absorb it and use
it to explain the massacres to which we are being subjected.
The Jews have succeeded in creating an international alliance against Islam
under their leadership, essentially covering the Crusader powers. These are
America and Russia, with their three churches: Orthodox, Protestant, and
Catholic. They added the Hindu and Confucian Buddhist powers in India,
China, and Japan to these. This is how everyone came to be against the
Muslims.
Of course, there is no need for us to point out that the financial power of
international Jewry is what made it possible for them to gain intellectual and
political control of the world today. Nor should we forget that this compact
front is full of cracks that we can use, indeed which we must use. “Strong is
their fighting (spirit) amongst themselves.” [TC. Koran, 59:14] Of course,
we must never forget what happened during the Crusader wars of the 11th
and 12th centuries when all the armies of Europe marched on Syria. The
moment they stepped foot there, the internal struggle amongst them began
for booty and spheres of influence. In the end this is what led to their
destruction, as the spirit of Islam rose in the area and loyal leaders appeared.
This picture is unchanged except in form. This is exactly what is happening
now in Islamic territory. Under current international conditions, the
Russians appear to have been delegated internationally by Christians and
Jews to wage war against Islam and defeat the Muslims in areas under the
influence of the Orthodox Church in Europe, central Asia, and the
Caucasus. Catholic France has similarly been delegated with respect to
Algeria, Tunisia, and Lebanon. The biggest of all, the United States and its
satellite Britain, constituting the Protestant axis, together with Israel as the
political representative of international Judaism, have assumed
responsibility for Syria, Egypt, the Arabian Peninsula, Iraq, Libya, and the
Sudan. It is important to observe that Islam is the ideological foe of this
unholy alliance containing the idols of the whole world, but the weight of
Muslim armies poses no physical danger to those of the West.