Bin Laden would probably have those sharing his letter killed

Bin Laden would probably have those sharing his letter killed
© EPA/AUSAF NEWSPAPER   |   An Ausaf newspaper photograph dated 08 November 2001 shows Saudi-dissident Osama bin Laden (L) sitting with his deputy Ayman al-Zawahiri at his hide out at an undisclosed location in Afghanistan.

“The Letter to America” was published a year after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, which to this day mark the bloodiest terror attack in history. The document had been available online for years, but only recently turned viral on TikTok, a controversial social network (particularly due to its content) closely monitored by certain governments or actually banned by others, amidst concerns it might be used by Beijing to promote part of the messages it carried or to spy on other countries.

Some of the people who comment on Bin Laden’s letter claim the document has made them understand why the United States is responsible for what is now happening in the Middle East and what exactly infuriates the Muslim community. Statements of this kind are, however, indicative of either a superficial perusal of this letter and an inability to grasp the true message of Bin Laden, or worse, a mischievous design.  In actual fact, this is a spiteful discourse that reiterates, specifically for Western audiences, those arguments that had been previously included in messages designed to rally the Muslims. It is also a rebuke of Western societies and a death threat addressing most Westerners. Many pundits as well as TikTok users have understood how ludicrous this situation is, where young Americans support the very man who not only said that “the decision to kill the Americans and their allies – civilians or military – is an individual obligation for any Muslim residing in a country where this is possible”, but he actually walked the talk. Beyond the absurdity of the whole thing, there is an ironical side to this story: many of those who actually distributed “the Letter to America” are themselves allegedly targeted by jihadis. This is transparent both in Bin Laden’s messages as well as the letter itself.

Bin Laden wanted a global jihad against Westerners, both civilian and military

Bin Laden’s take on jihad, the holy war in Islam, as well as the reasons that motivated it had been known prior to the September 11 attacks. In short, the terrorist saw the Muslim world under siege, occupied by the West. Bin Laden believed in an all-out jihad against the West, targeting military and civilians alike. The Western “siege” Bin Laden referred to was military, political, economic and culture – music, films and Western attire were equally considered haram, sinful. To Bin Laden’s mind, the “occupation” did not manifest itself through military presence alone, but also by supporting “non-Islamist” regimes in Muslim countries, or in those institutions imported from the West or modern judicial systems, which did not spring from the body of Islamic law – the Sharia. Western “occupation” had spread even to the holiest sites of Islam – Mecca, Media and Jerusalem, particularly the Al Aqsa Mosque, Bin Laden argued. In the former’s case, Osama Bin Laden referred to the American military forces deployed to Saudi Arabia after Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait. Basically, the United States had sent troops to protect Saudi Arabia and liberate Kuwait from forces loyal to Saddam, whose regime was, in ideological terms, an opponent of the Muslim extremism strain advocated by Islamists. No American servicemen ever had reached Mecca or Medina, and still Osama Bin Laden believed their mere presence on the territory of Saudi Arabia was a sin, since the prophet Muhammad allegedly said there should not be two religions in Arabia, and the second rightly-guided caliph Umar had driven away people of other confessions. As regards the Al-Aqsa Mosque (and the entire Palestinian territory), the fight for their “liberation” had for decades been a rallying call-to-arms for Islamists, dating back to the teachings of the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood, Hassan al-Banna. Moreover, Osama Bin Laden’s mentor and the theorist of global jihad, Abdullah Azzam, was a Palestinian himself.

There are three documents relevant to this discussion, two of which were published before 2001, while the third was made public a few months after the terrorist attacks. First, in 1996, Bin Laden called a jihad, also mentioning the Palestinian question and the arrest of the founder of Hamas, Ahmed Yassin and the assassination of Abdullah Azzam at the hands of “the alliance of crusaders and Zionists” (it is unclear who killed Azzam, although Bin Laden is widely thought to have orchestrated the hit in order to take over Azzam’s organization and absorb it into al-Qaeda). The 1996 document differentiated between civilians and the military, although it did refer to the jihadis’ responsibility to die in suicide attacks: “these young people love death just as you love life”.

In 1998, Bin Laden published a fatwa, a religious opinion whereby he no longer discriminated between civilians and servicemen, writing that the killing of Westerners, both civilian and military, wherever they are, is a sacred duty to every Muslim.

A third important document was published after 9/11. The attacks had just been labeled as going against the Islamic tradition (including by leaders of extremist cells such as Ahmed Yassin), which forbids the killing of civilians. Bin Laden responded in April 2002, publishing a long document where he explained the reason behind the attacks (which was the same reason invoked by the 1996 and 1998 fatwas), naming seven conditions that would allow for the killing of civilians, which he called “protegés”. In his 2002 “Letter to America”, Bin Laden redefined the enemy as Western societies as a whole, arguing that anyone who supported the West’s military campaign against the Muslims “in thought or action or with any other type of assistance” can be killed. Anyone paying taxes is supporting the government and the US army (or any other “aggressor”) and could thus be killed. Anyone exercising their right to vote or taking part in the process whereby a government is elected could equally be killed. Anyone sharing the vaguely defined “public opinion” was now a target.   

“Letter to America” – an ultimatum to the West: surrender or die

The binding ideas of the three aforementioned documents are also transparent in other works published by Bin Laden which, to a certain degree, the Al-Qaeda leader expressed in the few interviews he gave following his radicalization. These ideas were redistributed to Western audiences (that had already seen Bin Laden’s interviews) in the 2002 Letter, which has turned viral today.

In his “Letter to America”, Bin Laden criticizes what he calls the acts of aggression against Muslims in Palestine, Somalia (which were the stage of certain anti-terrorist operations) or Iraq (at the time under an international embargo amidst fears it had not discarded its WMD arsenal). Bin Laden made it clear those Americans who pay taxes that are then used to fund the army (which at any rate is also part and parcel of the American nation), make for legitimate targets. He implied more suicide attacks would follow, again arguing that his followers desire death more than the Americans desire life.

Bin Laden also specified the terms the Americans must comply with in order to end the jihad. He called on the United States (and the collective West as a whole) to surrender and abandon their very principles and Western way of life. First and foremost, he demanded Americans convert to Islam. This request has to do with the doctrine of classical jihad, which states that enemies of Muslims should be presented with three choices: convert, surrender and pay tribute, thus accepting a Muslim rule, or die.

His second request is that all Westerners should renounce “fornication”, substances that alter the mind such as alcohol and drugs. The West must ban homosexuality, censor showbiz and limit the presence of women outside the household, ban trading with interest (thus virtually destroying the banking system), etc. What Bin Laden wants is basically a society governed according to the dictates of Sharia, in its interpretation by Taliban extremists, Al-Qaeda or the Islamic State. What that translates to in practical terms was transparent in the territories these organizations controlled, where they moved from public executions (including stoning women for adultery) to banning music and most games (kite-flying was banned in Afghanistan, for instance), preventing women from working or studying or even leaving home unaccompanied by men from their families. There were even absurd cases where people were punished for carrying tomatoes and cucumbers in the same bag or selling them on the same stall at the market.

Bin Laden’s request that Western forces should withdraw from the East only comes in third, followed by the call on the population to stop supporting leaders.

Many of the people who shared and commended Bin Laden’s letter are surely living in families that have voted or paid taxes (or have done that themselves); many probably enjoy showbiz or support the rights of sexual minorities. Not only do such women feature in video recordings (which would prompt any jihadi to pick up the stick), but they also show themselves in public without a headscarf or wearing makeup. Beyond all that, we are dealing with Westerners, and their mere belonging to Western societies justifies their killing, according to Bin Laden’s “Letter”. 

Other opinions
The USA’s takeover of Gaza, a doomed proposal

The USA’s takeover of Gaza, a doomed proposal

Donald Trump said the USA might take over Gaza once Palestinians leave. No one in the Middle East can accept such a proposal because it would increase instability in the region.

The war is making pro-Putin elites richer, while it deepens inequality in Russia

The war is making pro-Putin elites richer, while it deepens inequality in Russia

The war in Ukraine is increasing the gap between Russia’s wealthy elites and the majority of the population. There is also a drive to redistribute wealth and channel it towards those loyal to Putin’s regime.

Why pro-Western Bulgarians no longer take their grievances to the streets

Why pro-Western Bulgarians no longer take their grievances to the streets

As various capitals in Eastern Europe are gripped by demonstrations, reformists in Bulgaria – a country with a tradition of protests – seem apathetic following years of political logjam and the return of the “system” parties.

EBOOK> Razboi si propaganda: O cronologie a conflictului ruso-ucrainean

EBOOK>Razboiul lui Putin cu lumea libera: Propaganda, dezinformare, fake news

More
Belarus elections: a show staged by the Lukashenko regime that fooled no one
Belarus elections: a show staged by the Lukashenko regime that fooled no one

Aleksandr Lukashenko won his seventh term as president with 86.82% of the vote and a turnout of 85.9%, results typical for dictatorial regimes. The figures were touted as proof of stability in Belarus, popular support for Lukashenko and tolerance of the opposition. However, the elections were neither free nor fair, but just a show that fooled no one.

What sovereignists do in Brussels when no one’s watching and what purpose they serve, if any
What sovereignists do in Brussels when no one’s watching and what purpose they serve, if any

A new word is gradually gaining traction across media and political debates: “sovereignists”. How does it all impact liberal democracy? To what extent can sovereignists influence EU politics?

Poland’s EU Council Presidency: Security First!
Poland’s EU Council Presidency: Security First!

On a brisk January morning in Strasbourg, Donald Tusk, the Prime Minister of Poland, stood before the European Parliament to deliver what many have already labeled a defining speech of his career. With his characteristic blend of gravitas and urgency, Tusk addressed Europe’s place in an increasingly volatile world. Referring to the profound shifts in transatlantic relations under Donald Trump’s presidency, Donald Tusk paraphrased another US President, John F. Kennedy: “Ask not what America can do for Europe and its security—ask what we can do for it”. His words reverberated across the chamber, signaling the dawn of a (let’s hope) pivotal six months in European politics: Poland’s presidency of the Council of the European Union.

NATO’s enlargement increased security in the Baltic region, but more needs to be done
NATO’s enlargement increased security in the Baltic region, but more needs to be done

New NATO members Finland and Sweden are increasingly involved in the security of the Baltic region, which has seen a number of aggressive Russian moves including sabotages of undersea infrastructure. However, the potential for cooperation with the Baltic countries has merely been tapped.

The Romanians who joined Georgescu’s hora felt “the touch of angels”
The Romanians who joined Georgescu’s hora felt “the touch of angels”

At the Union Hora, organized by the followers of Călin Georgescu, I got into a mix of nationalist mysticism, conspiracy theories, false Russian narratives and the belief that the "president elect" is some kind of messianic figure who will turn Romania into another Dubai.

Ariana Coman
25 Jan 2025
Putin's wars and the end of Europe’s dependency on Russian energy
Putin's wars and the end of Europe’s dependency on Russian energy

Putin believed that by invading Ukraine and engaging in wars in the East, he was restoring Russia's great power status. The result was Moscow's long-term loss of influence.