The Dish

A reader writes:

My friends and I have been talking about this, and we have another, perhaps more convoluted theory.  That terrorist organizations and (more specifically) their leadership, are motivated by rational behavior more than religious zealotry.  Zealotry is just the weapon, used by rational top-tier actors like Bin Laden.  The biggest goal of leadership is to maintain their power and the influence of their organization.  Thus, the organization benefits if it:

1. Is seen as the underdog

2. Has a seemingly invincible foe onto which it directs rhetoric and violence

3. Carries the support of an indigenous population

4. Can convince others that its mission is righteous

Recall that much of the world rallied behind us after 9/11, people and governments and old stale friendships and even enemies were moved by the destruction that day.  And the immediate steps we took directly after to freeze assets and other strategic maneuvers hurt Al Qaeda greatly.  While Al Qaeda certainly scored a "victory" over us on 9/11, how would other, similarly spectacular victories shift the balance of power?  What would happen if they were to detonate a dirty bomb in a major US or European city, or carry multiple repeat victories?

The delicate balance would shift.  They would no longer be the underdog, the David taking on Goliath–it would be extremely hard to maintain that illusion.  They would be viewed as out of control and dangerous and brutal to the populations that currently support them. Their foe–the United States–would lose it’s devilish, invincible nature, become beatable.  And their mission, viewed by the bulk of humanity, would be stained and less righteous.  The most recent example of this was the rejection of Al Qaeda by the Sunni minority in Iraq–they overstepped their bounds, lost the "liberator" illusion, and payed for it.

 

If you view terrorist organizations as rational actors, constantly working to cultivate a delicate balance that keeps popular indigenous support, nations from unifying and the underdog illusion alive, then it certainly becomes possible that part of the reason we haven’t seen a terrorist attack on US soil for 7 years is because they simply have chosen not to.

Clinton always plagiarizes, doesn’t she?

On a campaign phone call yesterday, John Dickerson asked the Clinton campaign, "What foreign policy moment would you point to in Hillary’s career where she’s been tested by crisis?" Take a listen to the audio.

Today is Robert Lowell’s birthday. From his classic "For the Union Dead:"

The old South Boston Aquarium stands
in a Sahara of snow now. Its broken windows are boarded.
The bronze weathervane cod has lost half its scales.
The airy tanks are dry.

Once my nose crawled like a snail on the glass;
my hand tingled
to burst the bubbles,
drifting from the noses of the cowed, compliant fish.

More here.

It seems like Clinton took Bill Kristol’s advice.

My military reader in Iraq (who will remain anonymous) offers some more detailed independent evidence to back up his view that Sunni-Shia reconciliation is happening, and that partition or withdrawal would be mistaken:

Here are some independent sources you can consult if needed regarding Sunni-Shia cooperation.  You can find all of these in the public domain (although to get the full import of what is going on it would help a great deal if you spoke Arabic or could have a reliable translator translate it). – In May 2007, Sahawa al-Iraq (the Sunni militia which defeated AQI in Anbar) met with the Sadr Trend (Maqtada al-Sadr’s guys).  It was a big meeting which received widespread publicity.

– In Oct 2007, Sahawa al-Iraq had several major and well publicized meetings (in Anbar) with the ISCI/Badr to discuss cooperation between them.

– Also in Oct 2007, Sahawa al-Iraq had several major and well publicized meetings (againg in Anbar) with the Shia Karbala Sheikhs to discuss cooperation between them.

None of these meetings were facilitated by Coalition Forces.  They did it themselves.

– The bitter and damn near universal condemnation by Sunnis in the Iraqi press and official government statements late last year when the US Congress passed their bill in favor of some kind of Iraqi partition.  The reaction on the Iraqi street was even more negative (probably because the average Iraqi didn’t really understand what the US Congress had done or what it meant- they just heard the US was going to partition Iraq).

– Neither the Shia Arabs, Sunni Arabs nor Sunni Kurds have a majority in the Iraqi Council of Representatives and hence cannot get any legislation passed by themselves.  Every piece of legislation passed requires a non-sectarian, non-ethnic voting block to get the required votes.  Get an English translation of the legislation passed into law in the past year and remember that simple fact- it would open some eyes to what is really happening here.  Incidentally, I confidently predict that the Iraqis will find an acceptable compromise on every piece of major legislation still in the works.

Kenyan bloggers respond to the power-sharing deal in Nairobi. One opinion:

It is my sincere hope that the International press the likes of Al Jazeera, CNN, BBC, SKY News will now feature this joyous news on a 15 minute basis to highlight that Kenyans are not just about machettes but co-existence , perseverance,  resilience, agreement, peace, love and unity. Dont just sell the negative!

Two fewer: Lamar Alexander and Amy Klobuchar had indeed held elective office before the Senate.

This time: the Miami Herald’s Jim Morin.