Post-Zarqawi Iraq
First, the AP has just released photos of one of Zarqawi's 70 virgins. (UPDATE: "Virgins" may just be "white raisins" -- though I'm guessing hellfire...)
A Crucial Moment
Zarqawi’s demise, our opportunity.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
Simply stated, the killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi by U.S. forces in Iraq is more vital to ultimate success in the war on terror than would be snuffing out any other terrorist alive right now. Period.
For close to five years, al Qaeda’s top leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, have been reduced to hurling video threats rather than bombs as they scurry from place to place trying to stay one step ahead of the grim reaper. In vivid contrast, Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born emir of “al Qaeda in Mesopotamia,” has been a vibrant, hands-on leader.
As he committed atrocity after atrocity, for years and seemingly with impunity, Zarqawi became a mythic figure in a part of the world where mythology has vastly more cachet than reality. His exploits stoked the triumphalism of the bin Laden narrative, which unfolds an Islam so transcendent it drives infidel superpowers out of Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Somalia, annihilates their embassies and naval destroyers, and reaches even into their territories to murder unbelievers and destroy the symbols of their earthly might.
In short, he embodied for jihadists -- and, more consequentially, for the untold thousands sympathetic to jihadism but on the fence about whether to cross over into active terrorism -- the conceit that if they were committed enough, and ruthless enough, they could win.
Worse, he seemed at times to be succeeding in his strategy to foment sectarian warfare in Iraq between Sunnis and Shiites -- a strategy which, in its audacity, even gave pause to Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s top strategist. Indeed, it may even have strained the Sunni terror network’s key but uneasy alliances with Shiite Iran and Hezbollah (although how much the latter actually disapproved of Zarqawi as long as his tactics were destabilizing Iraq and thus undermining America is difficult to say -- particularly given our dearth of reliable intelligence in the region).
Hopefully, Zarqawi’s demise is a clarifying event in the United States -- for the administration, the Congress, and -- -hope against hope -- the media. This was the real American military in action, in all its effectiveness, doing what the American people sent it to do despite often impossibly difficult circumstances: namely, eliminate nondescript terrorists who strike in stealth then weave themselves back into the civilian population.
It is a mission our brave men and women -- again, the real American military -- perform brilliantly, day in and day out, despite lethal danger to themselves and immense pressure to perform flawlessly. Yet, what we hear about back home is Abu Ghraib. What we hear about is Haditha -- as to which the anti-war champion of the current fifteen minutes, Congressman Jack Murtha, is poised to accord our Marines a lot less due process than he and other members are extending to their radioactive colleague, Rep. William Jefferson.
What we might want to remember from time to time is that ever since we unleashed our forces, no American city has had to bury thousands of its dead or gaze upon barren craters where skyscrapers once stood.
Let’s further pray that the administration heeds what is sure to be the very strong public approval of Zarqawi’s killing, apparently along with other terrorists, notwithstanding that it came in an air strike -- i.e., an attack of the kind which always carries the risk of collateral casualties.
No one wants to see innocents harmed. But we are at war -- something often noted but never quite remembered. Innocents are in peril, both here and in Iraq (and elsewhere) as long as jihadists thrive.
The American people vigorously support, and have always vigorously supported, the deployment of our military for the purpose of capturing and killing terrorists in promotion of American national security -- taking the battle to enemy so we don’t need to fight them here. That is the Iraq mission we have always stood behind -- more than finding Saddam’s WMD, a lot more than grand democracy-building initiatives, and a whole lot more than crafting new governments that establish Islam as the state religion.
Of course we must support the long-term goals of the democracy project. But we must be realistic that they are long-term goals. Democracy in the Islamic world is a matter of cultural upheaval over years, not just a few elections. Whether the project can ultimately succeed is debatable. One thing, however, is surely indisputable: Like the U.S. national security it is intended to promote, the democracy project cannot be sustained unless the enemy is first defeated.
It was not democracy that killed Zarqawi. It was the United States military.
We began the war on terror with the clear-eyed understanding that Islamic militants cannot be reasoned with; they have to be eradicated. Winning the war on terror will require the resolve to let our forces do their job-despite occasional vilification from fair-weather allies who bask in the protection of American power while shouldering none of its burdens.
Today reminds us that we have the power to get the job done. The remaining question is whether we have the will.
A Crucial Moment
Zarqawi’s demise, our opportunity.
By Andrew C. McCarthy
Simply stated, the killing of Abu Musab Zarqawi by U.S. forces in Iraq is more vital to ultimate success in the war on terror than would be snuffing out any other terrorist alive right now. Period.
For close to five years, al Qaeda’s top leaders, Osama bin Laden and Ayman al-Zawahiri, have been reduced to hurling video threats rather than bombs as they scurry from place to place trying to stay one step ahead of the grim reaper. In vivid contrast, Zarqawi, the Jordanian-born emir of “al Qaeda in Mesopotamia,” has been a vibrant, hands-on leader.
As he committed atrocity after atrocity, for years and seemingly with impunity, Zarqawi became a mythic figure in a part of the world where mythology has vastly more cachet than reality. His exploits stoked the triumphalism of the bin Laden narrative, which unfolds an Islam so transcendent it drives infidel superpowers out of Lebanon, Afghanistan, and Somalia, annihilates their embassies and naval destroyers, and reaches even into their territories to murder unbelievers and destroy the symbols of their earthly might.
In short, he embodied for jihadists -- and, more consequentially, for the untold thousands sympathetic to jihadism but on the fence about whether to cross over into active terrorism -- the conceit that if they were committed enough, and ruthless enough, they could win.
Worse, he seemed at times to be succeeding in his strategy to foment sectarian warfare in Iraq between Sunnis and Shiites -- a strategy which, in its audacity, even gave pause to Zawahiri, al Qaeda’s top strategist. Indeed, it may even have strained the Sunni terror network’s key but uneasy alliances with Shiite Iran and Hezbollah (although how much the latter actually disapproved of Zarqawi as long as his tactics were destabilizing Iraq and thus undermining America is difficult to say -- particularly given our dearth of reliable intelligence in the region).
Hopefully, Zarqawi’s demise is a clarifying event in the United States -- for the administration, the Congress, and -- -hope against hope -- the media. This was the real American military in action, in all its effectiveness, doing what the American people sent it to do despite often impossibly difficult circumstances: namely, eliminate nondescript terrorists who strike in stealth then weave themselves back into the civilian population.
It is a mission our brave men and women -- again, the real American military -- perform brilliantly, day in and day out, despite lethal danger to themselves and immense pressure to perform flawlessly. Yet, what we hear about back home is Abu Ghraib. What we hear about is Haditha -- as to which the anti-war champion of the current fifteen minutes, Congressman Jack Murtha, is poised to accord our Marines a lot less due process than he and other members are extending to their radioactive colleague, Rep. William Jefferson.
What we might want to remember from time to time is that ever since we unleashed our forces, no American city has had to bury thousands of its dead or gaze upon barren craters where skyscrapers once stood.
Let’s further pray that the administration heeds what is sure to be the very strong public approval of Zarqawi’s killing, apparently along with other terrorists, notwithstanding that it came in an air strike -- i.e., an attack of the kind which always carries the risk of collateral casualties.
No one wants to see innocents harmed. But we are at war -- something often noted but never quite remembered. Innocents are in peril, both here and in Iraq (and elsewhere) as long as jihadists thrive.
The American people vigorously support, and have always vigorously supported, the deployment of our military for the purpose of capturing and killing terrorists in promotion of American national security -- taking the battle to enemy so we don’t need to fight them here. That is the Iraq mission we have always stood behind -- more than finding Saddam’s WMD, a lot more than grand democracy-building initiatives, and a whole lot more than crafting new governments that establish Islam as the state religion.
Of course we must support the long-term goals of the democracy project. But we must be realistic that they are long-term goals. Democracy in the Islamic world is a matter of cultural upheaval over years, not just a few elections. Whether the project can ultimately succeed is debatable. One thing, however, is surely indisputable: Like the U.S. national security it is intended to promote, the democracy project cannot be sustained unless the enemy is first defeated.
It was not democracy that killed Zarqawi. It was the United States military.
We began the war on terror with the clear-eyed understanding that Islamic militants cannot be reasoned with; they have to be eradicated. Winning the war on terror will require the resolve to let our forces do their job-despite occasional vilification from fair-weather allies who bask in the protection of American power while shouldering none of its burdens.
Today reminds us that we have the power to get the job done. The remaining question is whether we have the will.