A presumed car bomb detonated in Tripoli, Lebanon today killing at least 4 and injuring over 30. The attack, similar to those of August 13, targeted Lebanese soldiers as they traveled on a bus towards Beirut.

The blast occurred in the Bahsas region, where local officials claim the bomb was concealed in a parked car and remotely detonated as the bus rode by. “Once again the hand of treachery targets the military … in a terrorist attack,” said one Military statement. Two months prior, a similar attack killed 18 civilians and security personnel.

The attacks highlight a growing trend of sectarian violence which has peaked around the troubled nation. Government troops, Sunni supporters, the Alewite Shi'ite sect, and even the Palestinian Fatah organization have all taken part in this ongoing struggle.

The situation is growing worse, as the northern regions of Lebanon have become a breeding ground for new fundamentalist organizations. Paradoxically, Lebanon's efforts to confront Hezbollah have directly increased this terrorist violence. In creating militias to combat the Shi'ite hezbolla organization, the government has undergone a massive Sunni recruitment scheme, one that has directly led to the infiltration of security forces by Salafist extremists.

“The problem was the 14th March [pro-government alliance] tried to create a militia to stand up against Hezbollah but in fact they have eased the way for these probably Sunni terrorists to infiltrate the country," says one Professor.

All of this violence comes amidst the backdrop of a tentative peace agreement between Sunni fighters loyal to the Lebanese government, and Syrian-sponsored gunmen. Possibly to avoid blame, Syrian authorities are reporting that the car and explosives had potentially originated in Iraq. Whether or not true for this particular incident, it is quite likely that, as a result of the vastly improving security measures taking place around Baghdad, foreign fighters and extremists are beginning to vacate Iraq in search of other potential targets.

The Combating Terrorism Center (CTC) has reported that as coalition forces damage and disrupt Al Qaeda in Iraq (AQI), members and cells within the organization have begun to "bleed out' to other terror networks around Lebanon and Saudi Arabia:

"Some AQI fighters that have already trickled out of Iraq have bolstered violent movements in Saudi Arabia and Lebanon. This trend will likely continue. Although the threat to Europe and North America is real‚ French officials have tracked 24 fighters from France that have traveled to Iraq‚ fighters are most likely to join established Jihadi groups in areas of weak government control, such as Afghanistan, Pakistan, Somalia, Yemen, and Lebanon."

If these claims turn out to be true, and the car bomb / bombers indeed originated in Iraq, it will present a completely new dimension to the current crisis. Prior to increased security and the troop "surge', Iraq has acted as a vacuum for Islamic fundamentalists across the region. Should this vacuum turn off, or indeed reverse, it could pose a devastating challenge to Muslim regimes across the greater Middle East.

The NEFA Foundation has posted some interesting documents highlighting the growing rift between the Ansar-al-Islam organization in Iraq. The group, formerly known as the Ansar al-Sunnah Army, has been ravaged by infighting between core members and a breakaway splinter organization 'the Shariah Committee of the Ansar al-Sunnah Army”.

Ansar-al-Islam (Partisans or Supporters of Islam) is a Kurdish, fundamentalist organization formed in the northern provinces of Iraq. As with similar groups in the region, they aim to topple the Iraqi administration and install a Muslim, Shariah-dominated state. While ties to al Qaeda are not concrete, there exists a wide network of financial and logistical support, going so far as to harbor al Qaeda leader al-Zarqawi in 2002 and 2003.

After increasing pressure from American and Iraqi security forces, the organization has begun to crack, with various members (numbering approx 300) struggling to take control. The recently released documents highlight this growing tension.

Here's the story: in July, the Ansar al-Islam released a document titled "The Book of Truth', accusing the renegade sect of conspiring with the Americans. In response, the "Shariah Committee' fired back with a 32-page document highlighting al-Qaeda related atrocities and the lack of condemnation from Ansar al-Islam. Highlights include (taken from NEMAFoundation):

“[our leaders] know much about you, and if they were to publicize it, it would be a major and shameful humiliation Isn't it rather hypocritical for you to flatter others and act courteously towards the killers responsible for murdering many of you out of fear of their power, while you simultaneously assault your brothers and lie to them Who killed your men in Al-Ramadi, in Al-Yusufiya, in Nineveh, and in various other areas more than two years ago, and yet you forgave them? Was it not you who used to say that the greatest action that Shaykh [Usama] Bin Laden could perform today would be to declare the disbanding of the Al-Qaida organization in Iraq, because it has fallen into disgrace and it has become a cover for anyone with twisted goals in order for them to achieve these goals through this infiltrated organization. The only treatment for its condition is to disband it You sent messengers to Afghanistan‚ among whom was Abu al-Darda'a, may Allah have mercy upon him, who was dispatched in order to explain to [Usama] Bin Laden and [Dr. Ayman] al-Zawahiri the massive corruption of Al-Qaida in Iraq. When Abu al-Darda'a returned, he indicated that a delegation would be sent by al-Zawahiri to Iraq in order to confirm whether these reports were true. Then you told us that Abu Musab [al-Zarqawi], may Allah have mercy upon him, was impeding the arrival of this delegation in order to prevent the truth from being revealed. It should be noted that the era of Abu Musab should be considered to be a golden era when compared to what happened afterwards."

This internal pressure is exactly what Coalition forces have hoped for. They know they have no definitive capability to eliminate the insurgency, but can minimize their effectiveness by diminishing local support.

Both Documents can be found here:

Ansar al-Islam's "Book of Truth':  http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellane…

Shiriah Committee of the Ansar al-Sunnah Army's "Book of Truth or an Imaginary Fantasy': http://www.nefafoundation.org/miscellane…

The Taliban in Pakistan have denied responsibility for the Islamabad Marriott bombing that left over 50 dead and 250 injured. According to Al Jazeera, Talibani senior commander Baitullah Mehsud claims "that their group does not believe in killing so many locals and would never overtly attack civilians.' Mehsud backs this assertion by highlighting the use of a rare explosive compound, RDX, in the hotel bombing.
"RDX was used in the attack, which is a very volatile substance. The big question is: Where did such a large amount of RDX come from?' The Taliban have reportedly never used this material.

Pakistani officials are claiming that RDX has been used in al Qaeda related terrorist attacks throughout Pakistan. "We are collecting evidence. The explosives were similar to those used in the Danish embassy, which was claimed by al-Qaeda, and the attack on the ISI (Inter Services Intelligence) camp in Rawalpindi last year,” the official said."

The news is being met with intense interest by counter-terror officials throughout the region. The recent bombing is providing further evidence that al Qaeda terrorist cells are relocating from Peshawar and the Northwest frontier and are setting up shop around the Pakistani capital. Whereas other terror incidents are often planned and coordinated outside of Islamabad, that does not appear to be the source of this recent attack. Due to increased security surrounding the capital, featuring road blocks, security checkpoints, and random searches, officials believe the truck bomb was researched, planned, and created within the city limits.

"Our focus at the moment is to track down the network in Islamabad which must have facilitated the movement and construction of the bomb,” a senior official said. "Carrying 600 kilos of explosives over long distances and through checkpoints is not possible, so our immediate suspicion is that the bomb was loaded in Islamabad.'

The Pakistani government does not underestimate the severity of these developments, nor should they. Pakistan has long struggled with fundamentalist elements, however these organizations were primarily based in the wild frontier provinces and were often preoccupied with either coalition forces in Afghanistan or Pakistani forces within the region. Should this conflict spread throughout the capital, they now pose a direct, existential threat towards Pakistani legitimacy and the government at large.

More distressing are reports that upper-level Pakistani politicians, including the President and Prime Minister, were set to meet at the hotel that evening. Plans were changed at the last minute. According to UK's SkyNews, there is now a major investigation underway as to whether or not inside information was passed on between the civilian government and terrorist cells. Should the new establishment be infiltrated by al Qaeda sympathetic individuals, there will be far more devastating attacks in the weeks and months to come.

In an immediate response to the attack on the US Embassy in Yemen, local authorities (with much American aid) have arrested at least 30 people in or around the capital. The terrorist attack, which left 16 dead including the assailants, highlights an increasing trend of small-arms, non-sophisticated explosives, and loosely affiliated individuals targeting immediate "soft-targets'.

An organization calling itself the "Islamic Jihad in Yemen' claimed responsibility for the violence. The Jerusalem Post is reporting that the group was motivated by political prisoners held in various Yemenite jails, and were demanding their release. ""We, the organization of Islamic Jihad in Yemen declare our responsibility for the suicide attack on the American embassy in Sanaa," the statement read.
"We will carry out the rest of the series of attacks on the other embassies that were declared previously, until our demands are met by the Yemeni government."

The American administration immediately began to link this attack to the larger "war on terror', yet the relationship between Islamic Jihad and al Qaeda is unclear. There appears to be loose affiliations between the two terror groups, and a mutual recognition of the others legitimacy and right to operate.

There isn't much insight to be gained from these attacks. The US Embassy in Yemen is an attractive target since 2003, and will continue to be. One interesting aspect of the attack, however, is the lack of sophistication, both in logistics and weaponry. Yemen is an extremely active location for al Qaeda related terrorism, and is so near Saudi Arabia that one must ask the question: Why were these attacks so unsuccessful? As Saudi officials have cracked down on their domestic fundamentalist elements, many from within that movement have picked up shop and relocated to Yemen. As of late, a flood of money, arms, and individuals have brought about a second wave of terror within the small country. I don't mean to minimize the damage of 16 dead individuals, but for the region, in an area with so much personal and financial support, it should have been much, much worse.

With every passing explosion in downtown New Delhi, it became more and more clear that America and its western partners are ignoring a valuable ally in their war against Islamic fundamentalism. India has always been regarded as somehow unique to the league of democracies, although there are no legitimate reasons for this exclusion. Perhaps it is the perception of India as somehow non-western and thus somehow non-democratic. Perhaps it is because they do not share the same color skin (at least for the time being) as American and European leaders. But as India makes its leap towards the world stage, economically and politically, the similarities and threats facing the burgeoning nation are strikingly similar to those in the world's most developed countries.

The "War on Terror', initially framed as a two-sided struggle with the world's democracies on one side and the Islamic fundamentalists on the other, has begun to devolve in to three separate conflicts over three distinct issues: Globalization, Palestine, and Kashmir.

At its most daunting and epic scale, there is an existential crisis between the "West' and Islamic militants over globalization: the direction of human progress, economic connectivity, religion and secular societies. Currently, America is the safeguard of this system and the onus of its protection falls to her. Everything from Iraq to Afghanistan falls under this category. Separate from this battle is political terrorism rooted in the cause of Palestine. As Israel retains sovereignty over the occupied territories, the majority of violence is aimed at her and her citizens. Just as World War II evolved in to a multi-theater war, the War on Terror is now developing a new theater, with Kashmir as the political endgame and India as the target.

This is certainly no surprise for Indians and non-Indians living in the region. The blasts that shook the capital were an extension of an ongoing campaign between Indian authorities and the so-called Indian Mujahedeen, an umbrella organization for various Islamic fundamentalist sects. The group is primarily composed of members from three different terrorist movements: Lashkar-e-Toiba (LeT), Harkat-ul-Jihad al Islami (HuJI), and the Students' Islamic Movement of India (SIMI).

Lashkar-e-Toiba (Army of the Pure) is based in Lahore, Pakistan, and operates a variety of militant bases across Kashmir. After years of secrecy under the Musharraf regime, they have recently rededicated their commitment to carrying out attacks inside India. Harkat-ul Jihad al Islami (Islamic Holy War Movement), a Taliban-affiliated terror movement operates out of Pakistan as well, with various cells in Bangladesh. Unlike LeT, HuJI envisions a global, pan-Islamic state, much like al Qaeda. Unlike bin Laden, however, they believe the first and most important stop on this journey is Kashmir. Filling up the ranks of the Indian Mujedeen is the Students' Islamic Movement of India, founded in 1977. Their mission is nothing less than the complete adoption of Islamic rule and law within the country.

All three terrorist movements, while fragmented and encompassing differing ideologies, have allied themselves over one common cause, Kashmir. Just as fundamentalist elements throughout the Middle East have found a common enemy in Israel and a common mission in Palestine, Islamic movements throughout the subcontinent are rallying against India. While daunting for Indian security forces, it provides a constellation of opportunities for counter-terrorism officials in the west.

Most immediate, this demonstrates the fractures within the global jihadi movement, a movement that lacks the overall cohesion and goals as it did in the days following September 11th. Infighting between Sunni and Shi'ah, militia and terrorist, those loyal to al Qaeda and those dedicated to the political causes of Palestine or Kashmir, these divisions allow authorities to isolate and attack specific cells. Secondly, while political reconciliation over the Kashmir crisis is no easy feat, it is perhaps the most solvable issue driving Islamic fundamentalism. There is zero chance that the "West' will abandon its goals of globalization, political freedom, capitalistic societies, and liberal democracies. Palestinian statehood remains as elusive as ever. Kashmir, however, has the best chances for success. India is a dedicated democracy, Pakistan has a newly elected civilian government, and both retain friendly relationships with the United States. With the proper diplomacy and skill, America can generate a tremendous amount of good will and support for attempting to diffuse the crisis in Kashmir, even if it is not successful.

The United States and her European allies must begin to view the "War on Terror' in its current form, not as it was in the fall of 2001. The global jihadi movement of al Qaeda and bin Laden has been surpassed by regional theaters in Iraq, Palestine, and India. While certain dimensions can be subdued, as is happening in Iraq, new fronts will inevitably open up. This can lead to one of two results. Just as Germany was inevitably defeated because it was incapable of fighting multiple engagements around the world, so too can be the fate of Islamic fundamentalism. The movement can become so isolated and multi-faceted that coordination and large-scale planning are simply too difficult to launch any meaningful offensive. On the other hand, it can be a testament to the true strength and determination of these terrorist movements. No matter how successful the world's most powerful nations can be in pacifying one particular aspect of the "War on Terror', it will undeniably pop up on some other part of the globe, perhaps in China, Chechnya, or Somalia. One reason to remain hopeful, however, is that the end-game, apocalyptic doomsday battle between al Qaeda and America appears to be on the back burner. At least for the time being.

A wave of bombings swept across New Delhi on Saturday, killing 20 people and injuring at least 50.  While information is still coming in, multiple sources have confirmed at least six explosions in five different locations, with police defusing an additional two bombs.  Areas affected by the bombings were: Gaffar Market, Connaught Place, M Block Maret, and Barakhamba Road.  Authorities believe the explosives were hidden in backpacks and other small containers, and have shut down cell-phone networks to avoid further detonations.
An Islamic fundamentalist organization, the Indian Mujahedeen, has claimed responsibility for the attack.  The group is also blamed for prior bombings in other Indian cities, such as Bangalore and Ahmadebad.   The claims were sent via email to local news channel CNN-IBN, saying "”Do whatever you can. Stop us if you can. In the name of Allah, the Indian Mujahedeen has struck back again."
The Indian Mujaheheen is not a typical fundamentalist cell, but instead acts as an umbrella organization for various other terrorist movements, specifically Harkat-ul-Jihad-e-Islami and the Students Islamic Movement of India.   Authorities believe the alias is used to take pressure off of the more traditional terrorist institutions, as well as confuse investigators.
More detailed analysis of the Indian terror threat to come on Monday.

Photo by AP

To commemorate the 9/11 attacks on the United States, al-Qaeda has released a 90-minute video featuring their No. 2 man, Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri.  The tape, released to al Jazeera in Qatar, references the crisis in South Ossetia as well as other current events, dating the recording of the statement to some point in mid august.

In the past, these video and audio recordings would raise alarm bells to those in the west, both politicians and civilians.   In recent years however, a litany of statements denouncing America, Europe, and Israel have been followed with little or no terrorist activity.   As more and more tapes are released, they receive less and less attention.  This will undoubtedly be the case this time around, as al-Zawahiri's tirade is aimed not at the US, UK, or Israel, but at various power-players within the Muslim world, including Iran and Hezbollah.

The crux of the tape is Al-Zawahiri's argument that the Muslim community is facing a new threat from the Iranian "Coalition'. He claims Tehran is "cooperating with the Americans in occupying Iraq and Afghanistan,' and blasts their recognition of the two new regimes.  Zawahiri then shifts his focus to Lebanon.  He calls the Lebanese government an "agent' of Washington, then scorns Hezbollah for "losing' its war with Israeli forces.  “The most bizarre and astounding thing is that Hassan Nasrallah [Hezbollah's leader] celebrates a victory every year. What victory? Retreating 30 miles backwards?"  Zawahiri proceeds to indict the broader Shi'ite community, accusing them of shying from jihad in Iraq and elsewhere.  This is part of al Qaeda's growing critique of Shi'ah Muslims, and highlights a successful counter-terrorist strategy of "identity division' across the region.

After the American invasion of Afghanistan and Iraq, al Qaeda enjoyed a period of unprecedented popularity and support across much of the Muslim world: from Morocco to Pakistan.  This broad coalition was aimed at all Muslims, arguing that the "far enemy', the West, must be attacked and defeated to bring about a true, transnational Muslim state.   This transnational identity brought foreign fighters in to Iraq and stirred up rebellion throughout the region.

Now, American policy is increasingly focused on breaking apart this fundamentalist coalition.  Awakening Councils have divided the Sunni insurgency in Iraq, Iranian cooperation has eased some tensions throughout the region, and a newly elected Pakistani civilian authority is healing the wounds inflicted by Musharraf.  Al Qaeda must now re-shift its focus back to the "near enemy' in the Middle East, and place the west on the back burner.  Indeed, the same successes seen in Anbar province and throughout Iraq can be used as the model for the region at-large .   One counter-terror analyst, writing in the Financial Times, says "I believe this [video] is connected to the situation in Iraq where al-Qaeda is on the defensive. The Iranian influence in Iraq is very noticeable. Iran backs the Shia parties and now the Sunni groups in the country have also been moving against al-Qaeda.'  As more and more factions within the region turn away from the al Qaeda-inspired global Muslim identity, fundamentalist recruitment and travel becomes more and more difficult, as do further attacks.

The splintering of these groups should not be seen as detrimental to the Muslim community in any way.  I am not arguing that Lebanon and Iran should feel animosity towards their Arab neighbors, or that Sunni and Shi'ah violence takes the heat off of coalition forces.  What's beneficial to counter-terrorism officials is that there appears to be an erosion of the transnational, global, jihadi ideology of bin Laden, and this erosion is taking its toll on al Qaeda.

It appears as if American frustration over the growing threat of al-Qaeda in Pakistan has forced the US military to act alone. After years of courting the Musharraf regime, and now in the face of increasing instability, ground forces have entered Pakistan to combat high-level al-Qaeda and Taliban targets. The incident occurred in South Waziristan , directly across from the Afghani province of Paktika, where the United States has various military installations. The Washington Times is reporting that this is President Bush's last-ditch effort to kill or capture Osama bin Laden before he leaves the White House.

The idea that these developments are entirely political seems a bit naïve of the facts. This operation is a direct result of a growing Taliban presence across the Afghanistan border in Pakistan, as well as an increasing inability of the Pakistani military to carry out these missions on their own. As I've posted before, the newly elected government is in a terrible position. Act too strongly against fundamentalist elements in the frontier regions and you are seen as acting on behalf of Washington. Do too little and you jeopardize American military and financial support. Well, this is what happens when the United States sees that you are incapable of doing anything. You are simply bypassed. Protests by both civilians and Pakistani officials are already beginning to mount.

Of course, this poses giant risks for both Pakistan and the United States. For Pakistan, it can increase domestic instability, make the civilian government appear illegitimate, and incite further radicalization amongst the country's more susceptible population. For the United States, the scars of Iraq and unilateral military action are still fresh, and any perception of acting "alone', particularly against Muslims, raises a host of questions the US would rather ignore. However, like Pakistan, America is stuck between a rock and a hard place. If you locate high value targets inside a sovereign nation, do you act immediately and ask questions later, or engage in diplomacy that could risk the operation? Do the rewards outweigh the risks?

In this instance, I would argue that the US made a major mistake in invading Pakistani territory; not on the premise, just on the timing. Were they to nab bin Laden or al-Zawahiri, then perhaps the incursion could be justified. The fact that they yielded no tangible benefits, at least publicly, is problematic. Act once, and you are acting out of necessity. Act twice, and you’re getting greedy.

What do you think? Justified or Inexcusable?

How does an Iraqi province renowned for its orange and date groves devolve into a hotbed of suicide bombings and civil unrest?  Diyala, an agricultural region of almost 7,000 square miles directly northeast of Baghdad, has become one of the most dangerous places in Iraq.   The escalating trend of violence continued on Tuesday, as a lone bomber detonated an explosives vest at an Iraqi security checkpoint, killing at least 28 people and wounding an addition 42.   The attack highlights the volatility of the province amidst decreasing violence throughout the rest of the country.  Why and how is this devolution occurring?  Unfortunately for those in the region, Diyala provides the "perfect storm' of necessary ingredients for a well-fed insurgency: ethnic diversity and an ideal location for stirring up trouble.

The population of Diyala is overwhelmingly Sunni Muslim, yet contains a strong minority population of Shi'ah and Kurds.  This ethnic tension has resulted in diverging loyalties and associations within the province.  Sunnis and former Ba'athists are somewhat sympathetic to al-Qaeda in Iraq, and have allowed the group to use the province as a staging ground, even offering terrorist leader al-Zarqawi refuge prior to his death.  The Shi'ah minority, meanwhile, have turned to militias to confront the Sunni-inspired violence.  The Kurds, hoping to escape the civil unrest wish to retreat to the Kurdish Autonomous region in the north. 

This diversity is a direct result of Diyala's unique proximity to all the differing parties in Iraqi society.  To the south is Baghdad, making it an attractive base of operations for those seeking to attack the Iraqi capital.  The province shares an eastern border with Iran, providing an ideal location for the spreading of Iranian influence including: financial support, weapons smuggling, and militia training.  The proximity to the Kurdish autonomous region in the north not only promotes the Kurdish minority, but also makes Diyala a prime spot for launching attacks against Kirkuk.  To the West is Anbar province, the former site of intense fighting between foreign fighters, Iraqis, and the US military.  Tremendous progress in Anbar has resulted in a 90% decrease in overall violence.  As of today, Coalition forces have begun transferring sovereignty to the Iraqi military.  This progress, however, has forced those sympathetic to al-Qaeda and other insurgency organizations to take up refuge in Diyala province.

The results are staggering, and are far more complex than the Sunni vs. Shi'ah divide.  Sunni fundamentalists are battling Sunni nationalists.  Shi'ah militias are fighting both.  The Kurdish groups are taking different sides and are attempting to retreat to the north.  Iranian influence is spreading from the east, Syrian influence from the West.  The Iraqi and US militaries are caught in the middle. 

In the overall narrative of the "War in Iraq', these developments offer reasons to be both hopeful and pessimistic.  Joint US and Iraqi military operations in Anbar have resulted in tremendous success and show that insurgent elements can be pacified with proper planning and logistics.  These insurgents, however, have shown their resilience and ability to relocate, possibly avoiding the increased troop presence following "the surge'.  Diyala has become a microcosm of Iraq at large, and further highlights the difficulties in achieving long-term success.  To succeed in Diyala, all interested parties must be represented and heard: Iran, Sunni Muslims, Shi'ah Muslims, Syria, the Kurds, and the United States.  If all parties can come together to provide a peace in Diyala, then peace in Iraq is soon to follow.