This is a very cogently argued, interesting thesis.

However, I think it's a misinterpretation of the data and an error of framing: newlinesmag.com/argument/what-… Image
1. Firstly, analysts shouldn't juxtapose transnational terrorism and local insurgency.

Operational capabilities and tactical considerations may shift, but AQ/IS have always and will always focus on external operations as well as co-opting local insurgencies. It's not either/or.
2. Additionally, what we are witnessing is not jihadists regressing back to their local insurgent roots.

On the contrary, we are seeing local insurgencies be entirely subsumed by inherently transnational movements like the Islamic State.
3. "Few today doubt that al Qaeda is moribund."

Dubious, and Hassan has always downplayed AQC's control over its "affiliates" despite evidence to the contrary.

(see, for instance:
➡️hudson.org/research/14365…
➡️lawfareblog.com/al-qaeda-after…
➡️hudson.org/research/16806…) ImageImage
4. The entire purpose of these so-called local insurgencies is to establish a base from which to export jihad.
6. An arbitrary distinction is being made between the Taliban and Al-Qaeda. They are not separate organizations in any relevant sense. Image
7. This leads to a broader problem: the Taliban are NOT non-state actors. Like Hezbollah and Iran, they are functionally an arm of the jihadist cabal controlling Pakistan.
8 (or 5, since I skipped 5🤦‍♂️). There just isn't evidence that jihadists have stopped attempting mass casualty attacks against the West.

Security services in every country are overstretched monitoring jihadists, and many "lone wolf" attacks are actually guided by organizations.
9. The AQAP-linked Pensacola shooting was ~2 years ago. Islamic State was shipping bombs to blow up planes in Australia and conducting suicide bombings in Manchester as of 2017.

The idea jihadists have given up trying to attack the West is just silly.
10. The opposite of the below assertion is true. Jihadist groups, if counterterrorism pressure is reduced, will regroup and start launching successful attacks against the West again as soon as they can.

The US may want to avoid conflict, but the jihadists certainly do not. Image
11. It might make more sense, logically, not to attack the West and force their hand.

But ideologues don't change their thinking based on logic. They can be pragmatic, but the goals always remain the same.

And attacking the West is a goal.
These are just some desultory criticisms I have, in no particular order.

tl;dr I do not agree with this localization thesis.

• • •

Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to force a refresh
 

Keep Current with CasualtiesOfTheDay

CasualtiesOfTheDay Profile picture

Stay in touch and get notified when new unrolls are available from this author!

Read all threads

This Thread may be Removed Anytime!

PDF

Twitter may remove this content at anytime! Save it as PDF for later use!

Try unrolling a thread yourself!

how to unroll video
  1. Follow @ThreadReaderApp to mention us!

  2. From a Twitter thread mention us with a keyword "unroll"
@threadreaderapp unroll

Practice here first or read more on our help page!

More from @Ayei_Eloheichem

13 Sep
I don't know if France is inviting Russia in as part of some hare-brained scheme to reduce or supplement its own footprint or whether Russia is just displacing France across the continent as it seemingly did in CAR, but this is not great: reuters.com/world/africa/e…
.@SamRamani2 wrote about this a year ago: fpri.org/article/2020/0…
Seems pretty clear Russia had a role in the coup: "Several hundred Malians rallied in the capital Bamako on Friday to support the army, as well as Russia, AFP journalists said, after the military reasserted control in the unstable Sahel state this week." africanews.com/2021/05/29/mal…
Read 6 tweets
13 Sep
Part I

State Department: I mean, this current Taliban cabinet isn't ideal, what with being all-male, all Taliban old guard and all terrorists, but we won't judge it because it's only interim and the REAL Taliban government in the future might be inclusive!

🤡🤡🤡
Part II. Fucking MIND-BLOWING

State Department: Will the Taliban uphold their commitments to freedom of travel and CT? "Will they sustain progress for women and girls?"

"We don’t yet know the answer to any of those questions."

YES WE FUCKING DO JFC
Full [infuriating] exchange:
Read 4 tweets
13 Sep
Very interesting discussion with @ObaidullaBaheer, @jmurtazashvili, and Michael Semple on Taliban "governance" and the conundrum of humanitarian aid provision, funds, and engaging with the Taliban given the looming humanitarian catastrophe.
My own opinion on this issue is that NGOs and governments empowering, legitimizing, and subsidizing brutal regimes and insurgents like the Houthis, Taliban, Assad, TPLF, AQ, etc out of humanitarian concern does far more harm than good 👇
The fact is that the Taliban just do not care about governance or aid provision or anything, really, beyond jihad and Sharia.
Read 7 tweets
12 Sep
This is fair. I bought into the "he's dead" narrative, but that's almost certainly not the case.
CENTCOM commander Gen. McKenzie said in June 2020 he was still in Afghanistan
UN report said the same towards the end of July
Read 5 tweets
12 Sep
While I am always happy to hear someone trash "CVE," and this article contains some legitimate criticisms, its overall thesis is 😬 newlinesmag.com/argument/under…
The author's key contentions:
1) CVE stigmatizes [Muslim] communities
2) CVE refuses to blame Western foreign policy for Muslim radicalization
3) Joining the jihad no different to drug addiction or other social ills, so "focus on making our societies more inclusive and hopeful"
Ironically, the author, in criticizing CVE, inadvertently falls into the same trap as the industry: It's the ideology, stupid.

"Improving the lot of youth" is not the answer to CVE – it's just another expression of the same liberal delusions.
Read 6 tweets

Did Thread Reader help you today?

Support us! We are indie developers!


This site is made by just two indie developers on a laptop doing marketing, support and development! Read more about the story.

Become a Premium Member ($3/month or $30/year) and get exclusive features!

Become Premium

Too expensive? Make a small donation by buying us coffee ($5) or help with server cost ($10)

Donate via Paypal Become our Patreon

Thank you for your support!

Follow Us on Twitter!

:(