Haykel on Zarqawi Letter
US Officials are denying the allegation by Sunni radicals in Iraq that Abu Mus`ab al-Zarqawi was killed during the US invasion of Iraq in April of 2003. They say they have proof that Zarqawi was active in Iraq later that spring. Meanwhile, wire services report that Zarqawi’s mother died in Jordan. His sister denies the US charges against him. I was struck in this report that Zarqawi is said by the US to be a chemical and biological weapons specialist. This must be a reference to the ricin allegedly produced at the Ansar al-Islam base near Sulaymaniya. But Zarqawi ran away to fight in Afghanistan while just a teenager, and I fail to see how he possibly could have become a chemist or biologist. If he exists and is important, he can’t be more than an imaginative and poorly educated thug. Even the letter attributed to him could not possibly have actually been composed by him, though he could have dictated the main points, because it was far to flowery.
For some definitions of Salafism, which comes up below, see Guilain Denoeux’s article, especially under ‘jihadi salafism.’
Speaking of which, I am very grateful to my colleague, Bernard Haykel, a Middle East expert at New York University, for permitting me to reprint here his analysis of the Zarqawi letter, posted at a discussion list on Thursday:
” . . . on Abu Mus`ab al-Zarqawi’s alleged letter to UBL which
was found in Iraq and has now been translated on the CPA’s website[:] I
first read it in Arabic on two Jihadi websites (Abd al-Mun`im Halima’s
(aka Abu Basiir) and Abu Muhammad al-Maqdisi’s Minbar al-Tawhid
wa-l-Jihad). Both sites did not claim the letter as an authentic piece,
but rather stated explicitly that the US authorities were claiming it to
be Abu Mus`ab al-Zarqawi’s. I will return to this last point in a moment.
I believe the letter to be either a forgery or one that was written by a
radical Sunni neophyte, perhaps even a sympathizer of al-Qaeda’s, but not
someone associated directly with the movement. When I first read it, the
letter’s language struck me as odd and not entirely in line with Jihadi
Salafi rhetoric and ideology. For example, the letter refers to the Kurds
in disparaging terms and this is inconsistent with Jihadi ideology for the
simple reason that the term Kurd (an ethnic or national designation) is
not an analytical category for the Jihadis–they simply don’t use this
language. One must remember that a number of Kurds are Jihadis themselves
and certainly the majority of Kurds are Muslim.
A second point that baffled me was the negative talk about the Muslim
Brotherhood (MB) and what bad things they had done in Syria! What have
they done in Syria? In 1982 they rose up in Hama against what all Salafis consider
to be a heretical (Nusayri) regime in Damascus: surely a good thing from
al-Qaeda’s perspective, though the MB were crushed and all the survivors
either fled into exile or were imprisoned. Since then some Brothers have
returned to Syria, having cut deals with the Damascus regime and abjuring
political activity, and this is perhaps what is being alluded to in
Zarqawi’s letter. I don’t think so, however. Many if not most of the
Brothers have refused to return to Syria and some, such as Abu Mus`ab
al-Suri (not the same as the abovementioned al-Zarqawi) who resides in
Yemen, threw his lot in with the Jihadis while still retaining his Muslim
Brotherhood identity.
The relationship between the Brotherhood and al-Qaeda is complex and
often very negative (al-Qaeda, for example, vilifies all Brothers who agree
to participate in the political processes of states ruled by the “Hypocrites” (i.e.,
lapsed Muslim rulers), but in the letter we get language that is not in keeping with
anything I’ve encountered before in Jihadi Salafi writings. Finally, the fact that the
Jihadi Salafis have not claimed the letter to be written by one of their
own, and the fact that today al-Qaeda has allegedly disassociated itself
from the `Ashura attacks (all the while still excoriating Shii beliefs),
lead me to think that someone else’s hand is at work in “Zarqawi’s
letter”. The argument that the language in this letter is too difficult
to forge, is not a compelling since any well-educated graduate of any
Shari`a college could have written it, and there are thousands if not tens
of thousands of such people floating around these days. I know that both
Mike Doran and Juan Cole commented on this letter earlier, confirming it
as Jihadi-Salafi. While I have the utmost respect for their work and
analysis, I have to respectfully disagree with what they’ve said about
this letter.“
Bernard Haykel
New York University