As I pointed out in two posts recently – (Bubble to burst on high seas thuggery and Pirates seek revenge on French and Americans) – the US confrontation with Somali pirates during the rescue of Capt. Phillips has forever changed the piracy game plan, and the US’s ability to sit on the sidelines. It was, IMHO, only a matter of time before the US designated terror group, al-Shabab and their AQ allies jumped on the bandwagon, racing to the Somali pirates’ aide. They, like Rahm Emmanuel, see no reason to let a crisis go to waste.
Thus far, all the talking heads have been assuring the world that the pirates pure motivation was economic, and not ideology. I, however, has said over and over that fisherman don’t buy their weaponry and maritime equipment from the local bait shop. They would turn to local contacts, most especially for illegal arms. And who is better equipped with those contacts than their backyard jihadists, al Shabab?
Back on April 2nd, J. Peter Pham, writing for the World Defense Review, agreed with my belief of heightened risks in the wake of the rescue, pointing out that not only were the Somali sea thugs not deterred by the US military, the possibility of a terrorist attack in the name of piracy has been growing.
Second, there is the risk of a terrorist incident targeting the naval vessels. Bruno Schiemsky, who formerly served as on the United Nations committee monitoring the arms embargo on Somalia, wrote earlier this year in an article on Somali piracy for Jane’s Intelligence Review:
Although this criminal activity is motivated primarily by the desire for financial gain, encouraged by a weak state and high poverty levels, there are indications that the pirates based around Kismayo and Harardheere (not Puntland) are strengthening links with Islamist insurgent group the Shabaab. As part of this relationship, the pirates are becoming more closely involved in arms trafficking through the region, increasing their potential sources of revenue…Although sources indicate that the Shabaab as yet plays no active role in piracy attacks, despite its links to pirate groups, this may change as the Shabaab develops its maritime component.
There are already indications that, as Schiemsky suggests, al-Shabaab is in fact developing a primitive maritime capacity, mainly to ensure the security of its smuggling operations bringing foreign jihadists into and out of Somalia as well as moving weapons and other materiel into the country. It should be recalled that the suicide bomber who killed four South Korean tourists and their local guide near the ancient fortress city of Shibam, Yemen, on March 15, Abdel Rahman Mehdi al-Aajbari, had gone to Somalia for training and returned to his native country to carry out the deadly attack. Given that the leadership of al-Shabaab, an al-Qaeda-linked group that was formally designated a “foreign terrorist organization” last year by the U.S. Department of State, clearly puts such ideologically-motivated objectives as driving non-Muslims from the Arabian Peninsula above its more direct political goal of toppling the flailing “Transitional Federal Government” (TFG) of Somalia – to say nothing of the pecuniary interests which drive the pirates – would it be too far-fetched to imagine the temptation which the assembling fleet must present to them?
He then references this all was prior to Osama Bin Laden’s latest tape to bolster the jihad movement in Somalia.
Just two days ago, Dina Temple-Raston, writing for the NPR, also noted experts were worried about AQ joining overtly into the lucrative piracy business.
Al-Qaida is nothing if not opportunistic. Its leadership watches the news carefully. It tracks how stories play. It adapts its tactics. Now, counterterrorism experts are worried that al-Qaida and its affiliates will be inspired by Somali pirates.
“Potentially, piracy is a platform for their activities,” says Robert D. Kaplan, a fellow at the nonpartisan Center for a New American Security. “There are already al-Qaida affiliates in Somalia. If they can make contact with pirate federations, then al-Qaida can use piracy as a form of terrorism.”
In recent months, al-Qaida has strengthened its ties with a Somali terrorist group called al-Shabab. And experts worry that group, through clan ties or family connections, could give al-Qaida an opening to the pirates.
“We should assume that al-Qaida will try to morph in whatever direction possibilities emerge,” says Kaplan. “And, remember, al-Qaida lives off weakly governed states in an Islamic cultural setting, and that perfectly describes Somalia.”
The article then turns to the more predictable rhetoric about the distance AQ has kept between their cause and the pirates…. and in fact makes special note about their silence during the US standoff.
The al-Qaida leadership was noticeably quiet during the latest standoff between the pirates and the U.S. Navy. There were no supportive video messages, no cry about the U.S. infidels attacking fellow Muslims. Bruce Hoffman, a terrorism expert at Georgetown University, says that is because al-Qaida is trying to lay low.
“In general these days, al-Qaida is remaining very quiet,” he says. “And I see it as part of an overall pattern of their working with local affiliates and not being front and center as they once were.”
Hoffman also believes that the pirates are a welcome diversion… possibly keeping Obama’s eye fixed soundly on Afghanistan/Pakistan. Kaplan, however, notes that the financial benefits of piracy would be enticing for funding jihad efforts.
It didn’t take long to prove those who attribute piracy only to economic means wrong. AQ, ever the opportunists, today have decided to publicly call on the Somali pirates as their own allies.
From Khaled Wassef at CBS News:
(CBS)A senior Saudi Arabian al Qaeda operative has called on Somali jihadists to step up their attacks on “crusader” forces at sea in the pirate-infested Gulf of Aden, and on land in neighboring Djibouti, which hosts France’s largest military base in Africa.
“To our steadfast brethren in Somalia, take caution and prepare yourselves,” Sa’id Ali Jabir Al Khathim Al Shihri (aka Abu Sufian al-Azdi) says in a new audiotape acquired by CBS News. “Increase your strikes against the crusaders at sea and in Djibouti.”
Shihri warns Somali militants against a conspiracy led by “the crusaders, the Jews and traitor Arab rulers,” to put an end to the Muslim extremists’ progress in Somalia.
“The crusaders, the Jews and the traitorous rulers did not come to the Arabian Sea and the Gulf of Aden except to wage war against you in Somalia and abolish your newly established emirate, and by Allah, they shall be defeated. They shall bring a curse upon their people,” Shihri said.
“We shall not leave them this time until we get to their own countries with the help of Allah.”
It was the first clear sign since the U.S. and French navies thwarted recent pirate attacks in the Gulf of Aden that al Qaeda is trying to take advantage of anti-Western sentiment, and a ready supply of well-armed young men with access to boats and maritime skills, in the restive country.
The “first clear sign”…. ah, those that require smoking guns to substantiate logic must now be feeling rather foolish at their optimism that AQ and their affiliated jihad movements would never stoop to piracy and blemish their pure cause.
In fact, according to one maritime intel source cited in the article, the talking heads have been wrong for about nine months now… noting that the links between the pirates and AQ-linked groups has been on the rise since then. Not that it stopped the same ol’ talking points from the media, mind you. Facts never do.
Shihri is, of course, another of those Gitmo grads (released in Nov 2007 to Saudi Arabia, and showed up in Yemen as an AQ leader) that needed to be let go after six years detention. As appears the norm, the evidence of his movements came up against a wall, as he repeatedly denied being involved with terrorists.
Al-Shihri was stopped at a Pakistani border crossing in December 2001 with injuries from an airstrike and recuperated at a hospital in Quetta for a month and a half, according to the Defense Department. Within days of his release, he became one of the first detainees sent to Guantanamo.
Al-Shihri allegedly traveled to Afghanistan two weeks after the Sept. 11 attacks, provided money to other fighters and trained at an urban warfare at a camp north of Kabul, according to a summary of the evidence against him from U.S. military review panels at Guantanamo Bay.
An alleged travel coordinator for al Qaeda, he was also accused of meeting extremists in Mashad, Iran and briefing them on how to enter Afghanistan, according to the Defense Department documents.
Al-Shihri, however, said he traveled to Iran to buy carpets for his store in Riyadh. He said he felt Osama bin Laden had no business representing Islam, denied any links to terrorism and expressed interest in rejoining his family in Saudi Arabia.
Apparently the level of evidence required to try such scum as Shihri is higher than those ACLU lawyers care to admit. We are led to believe it’s a bunch of victims held at Club Gitmo, picked up off the street doing daily errands.
Tim Sumner had an interesting post on the Free Republic a couple of days ago, stating the pirates were acting as taxi/shuttles for al Shabab weapons and terrorist fighters… (or would that also be AQ weapons and terrorist fighters?) Additionally they were splitting some of their ransom monies with al Shabab.
If none of these business ties with terrorists…. er, overseas contingency operations… can change the BS talking head rhetoric of “criminals driven by economics”, perhaps the outright call by AQ today will.
Vietnam era Navy wife, indy/conservative, and an official California escapee now residing as a red speck in the sea of Oregon blue.
Pirates used to finance al Qaeda. Gee, that was a real big secret.
Why Bush didn’t address it who knows.
Well, bill-tb… the intel reports say the relationship began budding in the summer of 2008, and still to this date, the media talking heads… including military leaders… say they are criminals with economic intent, not ideology.
So you wonder why… in the last 7 months of the Bush Presidency, when a US ship had not been seized, and everyone looked at them as int’l criminals… Bush didn’t make aggressive moves?
That was sarcasm, yes?
If there is such an entity as AlQueda – it would be logical to move out of Afghan to iraq then back to afghan & then down to somalia.
Keep the US on a rabbit chase – & forcing them to deploy (& maintain ) huge resources in many locations whilst moving the beachfront elsewhere.
From the time the Taliban held the US forces at bay in 2001 – long enough to let Alqeada slip out -before disappearing into the night themselves.
Each time they leave a rump of supporters who themselves disappear & return to bog down the enemy forces.
Who is next? I say Kenya.