Al Baghdadi and the US media commentary

President Trump, in announcing the killing of ISIS leader Abu Bakr Al Baghdadi, chose to stick to his usual trash-talk, which is unbecoming of the American President. Trump called Al Baghdadi a “coward” and a “dog”. Usually such language is refrained from so as not to provoke anger in the Jihadist world.

While Trump’s style is quintessentially trash-laden, the commentary in the US media is mind-bogglingly rubbish also. Some main arguments in the US media nowadays are that killing the leaders of terrorist organisations doesn’t end terror hence we cannot assume the threat is over. That truism is only convenient when used in downgrading Trump’s foreign policy credentials. It’s true that killing the leader of the terror outfit doesn’t end terror but that truth is used in the service of lies; the need to keep the hammer swinging around the world.

The fact that killing the leader doesn’t end terror is never used preemptively to avoid the use of the hammer, but rather to justify further bludgeoning. The truth is that this Whack-A-Mole strategy is rather counterproductive. Here’s a reality that is down the Orwellian hole; the war between ISIS and the US was triggered because the US chose to jump in the fight after ISIS attacked the Kurdish town of Kobani. Another inconvenient truth is that ISIS was created because of the US invasion of Iraq and the resultant sectarian violence. The bombing of the Al Askari Mosque in Samarra is an illustration of that.

Abu Musab Al Zarqawi was a thug who ran away from Jordan and ended up in Iraq where he created the Al Qaeda in Iraq. Bin Laden had rejected his requests for funds and support. Then came the US invasion of Iraq and Zarqawi’s presence in northern Iraq was used by the Bush administration as proof of Al Qaeda’s presence there and hence its collusion with Saddam. Overnight, Zarqawi went from an unknown thug to a star in the Jihadist world.

The US forces imprisoned Al Baghdadi in Camp Bucca on false charges after picking him up from his father-in-law’s home in Fallujah. When he was set free 11 months later, he left the prison as a radicalised Jihadist bent on taking revenge. While exiting the camp, he famously told the guards outside the prison, “I’ll see you guys in New York.” Once again, it is the humiliation people face from how they are treated by occupying forces that convert them into butchers. Lawrence Wright highlights this subtle, yet important factor in his book, The Looming Tower.

The so-called experts specialise in discrediting their own argument moments after making it. They argue that the journey has not ended yet — killing the leader is only a small fraction of this fight because the influence of ISIS is a big concern. Well, then why not fight against their influence by attacking the reasons of that influence? They also argue that the fight must go on to deny them the territory they once held between Iraq and Syria. But then they say that ISIS is Internet savvy, spreading their ideology online; convincing disgruntled and vulnerable young people to commit acts of terrorism.

Carl Sandburg once said, “If the facts are against you, argue the law. If the law is against you, argue the facts. If the law and the facts are against you, pound the table and yell like hell.” I believe the US media is indulging in “yell like hell” because of their unconvincing and unintelligent noise. When the leader is not killed, they argue in favour of the manhunt, when manhunt can’t be advocated for (since the leader is killed) they argue the resilience of the organisation and the threat it poses. When they have neither, they claim national security interests, which are the magic words that can trump anything, even Trump.

Published in The Express Tribune, October 31^st, 2019.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.