NARRATIVES: 1. The United States will revive Islamic terrorism to challenge Russia’s interests. 2. The United States has created jihadist groups in order to fulfill its objectives ever since the Soviet war in Afghanistan.
BACKGROUND: Ever since the Cold War, a number of narratives have taken hold regarding the United States’ imperialism and its efforts to seize hold of a large part of the world, using either its secret intelligence – the CIA – or sheer force, the army. These narratives (some of which reflect Washington’s genuine support for government or friendly opposition forces or even American interventionism in some states) also underlie other conspiracy theories regarding all sorts of objectives pursued by the Americans and forces in league with them, or their real influence and strength. In this case, the authority of the CIA at times takes on downright mythical proportions, as the agency is assigned significant power to infiltrate and influence events and politicians, but also to manipulate and distort the facts. This type of narratives has also been used after the Cold War, and a specific category deals with the alleged connection between the USA / CIA and Muslim extremism, which range from certain statements about the foundation of Al-Qaeda (and later of the Islamic State), with the support of Americans, to conspiracy theories claiming that the 9/11 attacks were actually orchestrated by a Washington-based cabal. The theories also feed on the fact that, to a certain extent, followers of global Jihad or organizations that were subsequently tied to them were involved in anti-Soviet fighting in Afghanistan, and since the United States supported these efforts, there must have been a connection. There’s no proof jihadist groups were used as a front by the CIA and other American organizations, or that the global Jihad was launched by order of the Americans.
Such theories are particularly commonplace in the Middle East, where suspicion against Americans is fueled by the United States’ strategic partnership with Israel and certain authoritarian Arab regimes, but also by its military presence in the region and the war waged against extremist groups, who also employ propaganda campaigns. US narratives have been – and continue to be – reinforced over the years by regimes hostile to the United States, such as Iran.
Outside the Western world, the theories have been reinvigorated by Russia in countries like Romania, where the embedded anti-American sentiment disseminated in the years of communist propaganda (perpetuated by certain public figures and publications after the Revolution as well) was strong enough to help them take root.
One of the arguments that’s been quite frequently used these days to confirm an alleged link between Muslim terrorism and the United States is the drop in the number of attacks on Western countries in recent years, and particularly during the pandemic. However, the same theory fails to consider three key facts: 1) the pandemic has restricted freedom of movement all over the world, both in the West and in the East. 2) powerful jihadist organizations such as Al-Qaeda and the Islamic State have sustained major losses in the recent wars in the East. 3) these organizations have been under a tremendous amount of international pressure for years, and various countries are constantly looking for ways to up their security, so that counterterrorist measures cannot yield results over such a long period of time. The fact that jihadist terrorism continues to make headlines is also transparent in the fact that jihadist attacks have never stopped, albeit of smaller scale and intensity, in traditional conflict zones and are sweeping over to regions which, until recently, had been considered of secondary importance, such as Africa.
PURPOSE: To undermine the image of the United States, the prominent power of the Euro-Atlantic partnership.
WHY THE NARRATIVES ARE FALSE: The Soviet Union intervened in Afghanistan in order to set up a loyal Government at a time when the country was already swept by civilian turmoil and the uprising of various groups with overt Islamic ideologies (although of a fundamentally different vein compared to later jihadist organizations), whose combatants were called “Mujahideen”, “those engaged in jihad”, their names owing to their participation in a war which they believed to be sacred. In the Cold War context, the United States reinforced Afghan insurgents and also encouraged grassroots support for their cause in the Muslim world. The war was sold as a jihad to Muslims, since jihad is a sacred duty, and a good Muslim will take up the cause either by fighting himself, or offering his support to jihadis (money, for instance). The United States provided funding (which the Saudis doubled) and weapons, but the money was usually handled by Pakistani intelligence. Admittedly, the latter preferred to redirect it to more radical Islamic factions, such as the one led by Gulbuddin Hekmatyar, whose movement however differed from Al-Qaeda or the Taliban. The United States had no direct control over the groups that fought in the war in Afghanistan. Some of the more radical groups did take part in jihadist attacks after the war (in Egypt, for instance), but they were targeting the interests of allies of the United States, so the assumption that Washington bankrolled their operation is absurd.
Al-Qaeda didn’t even exist during the Soviet war in Afghanistan. There was one organization called Maktab al-Khidamat, run by the Palestinian global jihad theorist Abdullah Azzam and partially funded by Osama bin-Laden, which operated much like an NGO (it was allowed to build offices in the United States to collect donations) which redirected funding to the war effort, tried to provide logistics and facilitated the transfer of a limited number of Arab combatants. Maktab al-Khidamat’s contribution to the general war effort was, however, inconsequential, being more of a private undertaking instead of a government action. After Afghanistan, Azzam was assassinated for his too moderate approach, and Maktab al-Khidamat evolved into Al-Qaeda, with Osama bin-Laden taking on the full leadership. Islamic combatants, including Al-Qaeda members, also fought in the war in Bosnia alongside Muslim forces, but again, their involvement is linked to the ideology behind jihad: wherever there are Muslims in danger / engaged in a war, the community has a sacred duty to step in. This also explains the presence of foreign combatants in Chechnya. A few years after the war in Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda declared war on the West and the United States for what it considered to be acts of aggression against Muslims, including for their military presence in the Muslim territories of Saudi Arabia, where American troops were stationed during the Gulf War. Al-Qaeda and various franchises and other movements that branched off, such as the Islamic State, have launched repeated attacks on the interests of the USA and its allies over the last 25 years, which, again, disproves the conspiracy theory claiming they are controlled by Washington.
Russia (and the USSR before it) joined the war on Islamic terrorism following its own acts of aggression – first in Afghanistan in the 80s, then in Chechnya in the 90s, and most recently in Syria. The war in Chechnya also exposed Russia to terrorist attacks perpetrated by more radical groups, but these didn’t emerge as a result of disputes with the United States, and their connection to the United States has never been confirmed.
PBS is not an official communication channel of the American administration, whereas Frontline, the programme that broadcast the interview with Muhammad al-Julani, has a long-standing tradition of producing documentaries (a few hundred in the last four decades) and scooping numerous awards. The allegation that journalists “don’t talk to the right people” is a typical ploy used by totalitarian regimes whenever professional envy is not the issue. Other people wanted by the United States have been interviewed by the media over the years (including Osama bin-Laden), but that bears no connection whatsoever with Washington’s official policy. In fact, the confusion over the role of the media or the status of PBS is not the only blunder in the Evenimentul Zilei article. The publication highlights the statement of a former official of the Trump administration, who not only is irrelevant in the current discussion, as the Biden administration now decides American policy, but is also known for his controversial claims in the past. Besides, Jeffrey merely said that, in the current context, Julani’s organization could be the lesser evil and an asset, which is a far remove from saying Julani is “working with the Americans”.
Donate
---copie-thumb.webp){kind=small}
