One hesitates to say this will amount to anything, but Marc Lynch notes that Mohammed Essam Derbala, a leader of Ayman Zawahiri’s Egyptian terrorist group that merged with Al Qaeda in 1998, today urged his former confederates to declare a unilateral ceasefire to "test Barack Obama’s pledges to establish a new relationship with the Islamic world and to close Guantanamo." Who’s Derbala?
Mohammed Essam Derbala is on the Shura Council of al-Gamaa al-Islamiya, an extremist Islamist organization at the heart of the brutal insurgency which roiled Egypt from 1992-97. He was arrested in 1981 following the assassination of Anwar Sadat. Back in 2002, while in prison, Derbala authored one of the first comprehensive critiques of al-Qaeda on behalf of the Gama’a leadership. In November 2006, Derbala was finally released after 15 years in prison, part of a larger project by the Egyptian government to rehabilitate and release old Gamaa members. He has since continued to criticize extremist ideology, has called upon al-Qaeda to renounce violence, and has frequently criticized al-Qaeda.
Let’s be clear about a few things. Derbala has no power to call for or enforce any Al Qaeda ceasefire. But consider how overwhelmingly significant it is that a former terrorist of such obvious credibility would say something like this. And why’d he say it? Because Barack Obama just renounced torture. He put the United States on a clear path to repudiating the detentions, interrogations and, as important, humiliations that Muslims consider the U.S. to have inflicted not just on terrorists, but the entire Muslim world. Part of Al Qaeda’s entire propagandistic message is that the U.S. is an unchanging brutish entity determined to subjugate the Muslim world. What Obama did today severely complicates that narrative. But it’s not enough for us to consider the narrative to be complicated — it takes Muslim figures of credibility to say so. That’s what Derbala just did.
This is what Carl Levin was getting at earlier today when he said that renouncing torture would have security benefits for the United States. It’s, of course, unclear what Al Qaeda would do. But in an important sense, Al Qaeda isn’t the target audience here. It’s the pool of potential Al Qaeda recruits. In March, an Air Force colonel in Iraq briefed reporters on what motivated foreign fighters to come to Iraq instead of remaining in their home countries living a normal life. The answer was often "an image from Abu Ghraib." That’s what Obama’s actions today have taken off the table for the U.S.’s adversaries. Its importance shouldn’t be underestimated.
Crossposted to The Streak.



39 Comments
Support this site!
Subscribe to the newsletter
Advertise on Firedoglake
Send
us your tips
Make us your homepage
About ATTACKERMAN
RSS/XML Feed
Evening, Spencer. What a difference a day makes, eh?
Yup. Thank you Bushco for the memories.
Thank you Obama for standing up and doing the right thing.
It won’t stop terrorism, but it is important to have the balls to stand up for the rule of law and realize that the unchecked images and realization of imperialism, racism, and torture…make it all the more likely to further inflame passions against the US across the world.
So who hasn’t recognized that cowboy shrubs policies have inflamed and excerbated the problems
Today at Blair’s hearing for DNI Levin (with whom I have lots of problems but not on this) asked Blair if waterboarding was torture. Blair temporized but said that waterboarding would not take place on his watch. Levin said that didn’t answer the question and repeated it. Blair again did not answer but said that he would not pursue anyone who had engaged in waterboarding and other torture practices because they thought they were doing the right thing blah, blah, blah, basically the Jack Bauer defense and this from a guy who said he believed in the rule of law. Levin said he was troubled by Blair’s response (as was I). It’s a shame this did not get more play because it was a key moment in the hearings.
Sure is funny that after centuries of the “Golden Rule” it still works….. so does the saying “if you treat someone with kindness it will be returned 100 fold”
I can think of at least one reporter who gave it play.
Same old shizzola. Duck and weave the legalities. Sigh. OTOH there is some pretty clear anti-torture rhetoric coming out Obamadom…
IMHO there is no way in hell that anyone will really be held to account for Bushco’s actions…but…I never thought Gonzo would go, and I never really thought Obama would really win the election…just shows how jaded I am..
The Rockefeller interview on Hardball is on right NOW. Listen to what he says.
I am …..
why can’t the people in gitmo have a “real” trial ….. in a real court and if convicted put into real prisons… Oh I forgot….. all evidence was obtain illegally ….
I think it is great that anyone in the Muslim world is acknowledging Obama’s stance. It give hope that we can have peace.
We can not hope to have peace when we are insulting and humiliating great swaths of socitey.
That is very, very cool.
Oh yeah, I meant the part about where he acknowledges (and he knows since he was read into the program and forbidden to speak about it) that NSA spied on journalists and he says, he believes it and believes that they spied on him personally, although he never received any “letters”…
And so it begins.
Thank you, Spencer, great post.
Good for you. Levin even pointed out that Holder had had no problem saying waterboarding was torture but Blair just would not take any of the outs that Levin was giving him.
I was also kind of interested in Levin question about the National COunterterrorism Center. At first I thought it was pointless because Levin gave no context but after thinking about it some more I think Levin was indicating they were not doing a good job. They handle some of the bloated watchlists and are tasked with coming up with plans, none of which they have done a good job with but according to Blair they were all peachy. So again Levin was giving Blair a chance to say he would look into something and Blair flubbed the lifeline. Makes me think there may be less there there with Blair.
It seems like Obama did more with one executive order then the Bush cabal did in seven years.
It should be interesting to see how ‘A Few Good Men’ Iglesias handles the Gitmo trials and the dismantling of Gitmo…! A fine day to be an American…!
Makes me wonder just how long the US has been doing this?
The NewsHour has on Phillip Zelikow and James Dobbins talking about the special envoys named today. I really dislike Zelikow. Anybody who could suck up to Rice and be involved in a lot of shady things like the justification for preventive war, well I can live without their opinion.
I realize there are logistical problems to solve but the one-year target for closing Guantanamo is a tad longer than I expected.
I think Obama gave himself some room so that the MSM won’t say “see, he couldn’t do it”. Probably will be done before that time limit, I believe.
Isn’t Zelikow the guy who never found his way to Ft Meade the entire time he ExecDirected the 911 Commission?
i know it only counts if an air force colonel says it and not us DFHs, but just for the record some of us have been saying for years that our response to terrorism, including torture, makes us less safe.
this is seriously great news. i hope it’s the beginning of a trend and not a one-off.
Someone tell me why that stupid s.o.b. Lyndie England went to jail when we won’t say that what when higher-ups do it, it’s a crime?
Well to paraphrase Upton Sinclair quote that I used in the last thread
Oops…what I meant was, is it only a crime if the perpetrator has an IQ under 100?
At a certain level crimes become policy differences, dontcha know?
the main thing is the administration was told this, SPECIFICALLY
The trouble is, it could have one of two opposite outcomes. The desired one, or providing a lower temperature environment to pursue negotiations. Or, the militant Islamists could be so pissed at this end run that they accelerate planning for another big attack.
Thanks for this, Spencer. Of course, this didn’t get mentioned on the evening TV news, but Hamas’ woofing at Obama sure did.
the benefit, i think, is not so much about those who have already been radicalized to the extent that they will support and participate in suicide terrorist type attacks – it’s about future recruiting.
I agree with that. I’m just pointing out that if it spurs the real radicals to a new attack, it will reinvigorate those here at home who think you have to kill everyone. And they’d have the country back on their side.
they were told by their generals, by the professionals in the cia, by the professionals in the fbi that they would be harming our soldiers, our cause, our national security, our hope for peace, they WANTED unrest
agreed. but that’s a sunk cost (i think that’s the term you all use? *g*), we’re going to have to deal with it sooner or later.
It’s only a sunk cost if you think there will be another attack, not matter what the U.S. or other agents do. I am agnostic about this as I have no idea of the many factors that would go into making such a forecast. I do think that the probability of another large attack in the U.S. is less than 100%.
sunk cost = risk of attack, not certainty.
that’s what i meant anyway.
Nope. Sunk costs is a 100% thing.
i would say it teaches me to use a term i don’t know well enough… but at least i learned something new, so thanks *g*
Yeah, but tomorrow’s a new day in the same empire.
I guess that just leaves support for Israel, military projection in the middle east, support for brutal and corrupt dictators and exploitation of economic advantage to the benefit of the US to go then.
Either we’re thinking Chomsky’s going to have to go back to his day job or we aren’t. We aren’t.
US-operated torture undoubtedly created a new wave of recruitment for jihadists. But that’s all it is, the new wave. So let’s make a stupid assumption that it just ended. That’d leave us with the recruitment poster that they had before it started. Not exactly insignificant.
I don’t know about you, but the old school jihadists concern me more than the new. They still kickin. Who’s resume starts after 9/11 are you gonna compare to anyone’s pre-9/11 one ?
It’s kind of simple. The defender has to defend all assets at all times from all threats. The attacker has to attack just one, once.
That leaves the question of motive, which is even simpler to comprehend. If you reverse the policies of the Bush administration, in the best possible, hypothetical scenario, you become the country you were on the morning of 9/11. Except that those Bush admin policies happened and nobody but star-struck US residents are writing them off any more this week than they were last.