Who The Hell is Zarqawi Anyway?!

The kidnapping of Kenneth Bigley and the car bombing at Al-Amel, western Baghdad, which claimed the lives of dozens of children, have focused attention on the Jordanian-born Abu Musab al-Zarqawi and his Tawhid and Jihad group. While the names have become increasingly familiar, we still seem to now very little.

Some have translated the 'tawhid' in the group's name as 'unity', but Juan Cole explains that "in Islam what is meant by tawhid is to "affirm the oneness of God" -- ie monotheism." The group adopt an extremist conception of monotheism which excludes Shia Muslims and probably a great many Sunnis. They have expressed these beliefs in a series of high-profile attacks which demonstrate little or no concern for the well-being of innocent Iraqis.

Supporters of the occupation and military officials have made efforts to pin just about every act of violence in the country on the group, but, as Sami Ramadani pointed out in the Guardian last week,

The occupation forces have admitted that the attacks on them by the resistance rose last month to 2,700. And how many of these 2,700 attacks a month were claimed by Zarqawi? Six. Six headline-grabbing, TV-dominating, stomach-churning moments.

Even if we attribute acts to them above and beyond those for which they have themselves claimed responsibility (assuming they did indeed carry them out and are not simply seeking to take 'credit' for attacks by others in pursuit of their own agenda), it is clear they are not as representative of the armed resistance in Iraq as some would have us believe.

The provenance of the oft-repeated accusation that they have links with Al-Qaeda is also dubious. Certainly there are ideological and tactical parallels, but this alone does not demonstrate that they are working in concert. Indeed, Jim Lobe points out that the letter, published by the Project for The New American Century (PNAC) and others, ostensibly from Zarqawi to the Al-Qaeda leadership, undermines claims as to an already existing relationship between the two organisations.

As with anything in Iraq it is difficult to develop an objective picture of the opinions of the Iraqi people, but it appears that Zarqawi and his followers have little or no support among the general population. Sami Ramadani, again, commented,

The vast majority of Iraqis reject Zarqawi and his ilk - as do the resistance and its supporters in Falluja, Sadr City and across Iraq. Many even suspect that the occupation forces are somehow encouraging the likes of Zarqawi, or at least failing to prevent their crimes, as a way of obscuring the fact that most Iraqis now actively support a patriotic and widespread resistance movement.

Indeed, after the Al-Amel bombing, at least some Iraqis held the US responsible.

That said, Rahul Mahajan who has visited Iraq on several occasions, warns,

The United States is, however, creating by its presence another force that could wreak havoc in Iraq, even if, as I think is eminently possible, major political forces can agree to settle things by elections and power-sharing rather than violence. That force includes, but is probably not limited to, Zarqawi's al-Tawhid wal Jihad (Monotheism and Holy War), which is obviously willing to stop at nothing in carrying out acts of random terrorism but which is, it seems, gaining support in some areas of Iraq because it is seen as an effective anti-occupation force. If this kind of cancerous organization can gain a toehold in Iraq, then civil war or worse is a possibility. Of course, even so, the continued U.S. presence just increases the chance that will happen.

I have written elsewhere that, in my opinion, the ongoing occupation is only strengthening the hands of those groups supporters cite as the justification for its continuation. That is very clear in this context.

The occupying forces are going to have to leave eventually. If I'm right and their presence is strengthening the hands of the likes of Zarqawi (not to mention less extreme theocrats like Sadr, another oft-cited justification for the ongoing occupation) then it is surely better that they do so sooner, rather than later, by which time such groups have developed a substantial power base and are in a position to effect a considerable and, most likely negative, influence on Iraqi politics.