It is not
surprising that Osama bin Laden tried to seize the spotlight by
injecting himself into the U.S. presidential campaign four days
before the election, when he knew the world's media would be
focused on the final days of the contest. His latest videotaped
message was a cheap and effective means of showing the world that
his Al Qaeda terrorist network still exists and remains a force to
be reckoned with.
What is surprising
is the pains that bin Laden took to tailor his message to an
American audience in an apparent effort to influence the outcome of
the elections and future U.S. policy. Bin Laden's videotape,
broadcast by Al Jazeera on October 29th, featured him
sitting demurely behind a desk, without his customary assault
weapon near at hand. He was dressed in a traditional white Arab
thobe garment and a golden robe reminiscent of the Caliphs,
not his usual camouflage battle fatigues. And he moderated his past
apocalyptic language, replete with calls for jihad and martyrdom,
to offer Americans a questionable truce: "Your security is not in
the hands of Kerry or Bush or Al Qaeda. Your security is in your
own hands, and any state that does not belittle our security
automatically guarantees its own security."
Even more
surprising, bin Laden may have intended to influence the vote in
individual states within the United States. The independent Middle
East Media Research Institute, which translates and analyzes media
statements made by Middle Eastern newsmakers, maintains that that
bin Laden was talking about U.S. states, not nation states. Such a granular focus,
while unexpected, jibes with the custom-tailored political message
that bin Laden sought to broadcast to Americans.
Someone within the
Al Qaeda network, if not bin Laden himself, clearly was following
the American political campaign. Bin Laden echoed many of the
anti-Bush partisan themes of this political season. He charged that
President Bush was lying to Americans, that the Bush family was
close to corrupt Arab royal families, that Bush had been elected by
"falsifying" the Florida election, that the Patriot Act needlessly
suppressed liberties, that the Bush Administration had stumbled
into a quagmire in Iraq, that the government budget deficit is
ballooning, that the war against terrorism will bankrupt the United
States, and that the war in Iraq only benefited companies "like
Halliburton and its kind" (a gratuitous swipe at Vice President
Cheney).
In addition to
attacking President Bush, bin Laden added to the insult by
attacking his father, President George H.W. Bush. According to bin
Laden, the former President imported election-rigging techniques
from his Middle Eastern cronies to rig the 2000 Florida vote
count.
Bin Laden even
suggested that the fact that President Bush remained for several
minutes in a Florida classroom after learning of the attacks on
September 11, 2001, enabled the 19 terrorists to somehow complete
their mission. While this crude propaganda resembled the caricature
of U.S. policy regurgitated by Michael Moore, bin Laden may have
believed that it had resonance inside the United States in view of
the popularity of Moore's most recent documentary film.
By stressing the
alleged similarities between the Middle Eastern regimes that he
seeks to overthrow and the Bush Administration, bin Laden sought to
incite Americans against Bush, just as he has sought to incite
Muslims against their own rulers. He undoubtedly hoped to defeat
Bush politically and may have surmised that a video message would
contribute to Bush's electoral defeat, while another terrorist
attack would backfire by helping Bush on November 2. Al Qaeda also
may not be in a position to launch an attack inside the United
States on the same scale as 9/11.
Bin Laden's attack
ad was a crude attempt to drive a wedge between Americans on the
issue of how to conduct the war against terrorism. Bin Laden tried
a similar tactic last April in offering a truce to European states
that withdrew from the war on terror. Although both Bush and Kerry
quickly dismissed any possibility of relenting on the war against
Al Qaeda, bin Laden positioned himself for future propaganda
gains.
If President Bush
had lost the election, it would have strengthened bin Laden's aura
of power and helped attract more Al Qaeda recruits. And now that
Bush has won, bin Laden can claim that Bush will provoke future
attacks by failing to follow his advice for "avoiding another
Manhattan." Moreover, Bush's electoral victory strengthens bin
Laden's previously stated rationalization that all Americans are
permissible targets for murder because they support the U.S.
government with their votes and taxes.
Although bin Laden
did not issue his usual blood curdling threats, he has given notice
of a possible attack, which is required by many traditional
interpretations of Islamic law. This helps him broaden his base of
support among traditional Muslims who reject his radical
interpretation of Islam, but nevertheless support his attacks on
America. By sitting behind a desk and posing as a statesman, the
terrorist leader also sought to fill a vacuum of leadership in the
Arab world. He undoubtedly hopes that "Bin Ladenism" becomes a
potent political movement that can achieve his radical goals
through mass action, not just revolutionary terrorism.
While bin Laden
sought to play the role of a statesmanlike Holy Man, Al Qaeda
earlier had released another videotape featuring "Azzam the
American," who warned that America's streets would "run red with
blood." Although it was not able or willing to launch a terrorist
attack before the elections, Al Qaeda probably already has another
attack planned inside the United States. Having failed to influence
the outcome of the presidential election as desired through his
last minute political attack ad, bin Laden is sure to renew his
terrorist campaign.
James Phillips
is Research Fellow in Middle Eastern Studies in the Kathryn and
Shelby Cullom Davis Institute for International Studies at The
Heritage Foundation.