Al-Qaeda Goes Back to Base--A Times (restructuring)

[Gloria]

From the new World Media Watch up now at URL in sig,
Tomorrow at Buzzflash.com


1//Asia Times Online, Hong Kong Nov 4, 2005

http://www.atimes.com/atimes/Middle_East/GK04Ak01.html



AL-QAEDA GOES BACK TO BASE

By Syed Saleem Shahzad

KARACHI - Al-Qaeda is in the process of a decisive ideological debate that could see the highly secretive group restructured within a year, with bases in Iraq and Afghanistan, and adopting a more open, centralized, approach.

Two issues lie at the heart of the matter. The first is whether al-Qaeda achieves its aims by "fighting against evil", or whether it "fights against evil and its allies", according to contacts familiar with the group who spoke to Asia Times Online.

The second issue involves al-Qaeda's lack of a physical base, a matter of concern to Islamic scholars, following its retreat from Afghanistan and subsequently being forced out of hideouts along the Afghanistan-Pakistan border.

Regarding the discourse on al-Qaeda's enemy, on one side a major portion of al-Qaeda wants to remain true to the original goal of ousting foreign forces from the Persian Gulf region and ending the occupation of Muslim territories; on the other, a powerful group led by Egyptian Abu Amro Abdul Hakeem, also known as Sheikh Essa, who has strongly influenced elements in Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, believes that the targets should be extended.

SNIP


However, the contacts maintain that the al-Qaeda leadership is optimistic that by the start of summer next year they will be in control of significant "space" in Iraq and in Afghanistan, which would legitimize their jihad in the eyes of scholars.

SNIP

If al-Qaeda prevails over its internal conflicts and adopts the strategy as outlined above, it would be a major turning point not only for the organization, but for the whole of the Muslim world and beyond.

[htuttle]

1. Does this mean they'll pick a new #3 guy?

[leesa]

2. Are they talking about the GOP or Al Qaeda? Is there a difference?

[dkofos]

3. No

They are the same