Peter Bergen
Free Press, 2002, 320 pp., $14.95
Peter Bergen’s Holy War Inc. takes a look at the inner workings of Osama bin Laden’s terrorist network. It clearly defines bin Laden’s crusade approach for the spread of Islam. One can quickly see how the Islamic mind works when it comes to jihad, as well as its contradictions. Bergen keeps things interesting by debunking various rumors and theories regarding the dissident Saudi millionaire. Have you heard the one about bin Laden’s playboy years of drinking and womanizing in Beirut? Well, Bergen counters, “those who know bin Laden…describe a deeply religious teenager who married at the age of 17.” He similarly dismisses stories about bin Laden receiving an engineering degree from a U.S. university, living in London, teaming up with Iraq to plot the 1998 African embassy bombings and receiving funds from the C.I.A.
To reports of bin Laden’s imminent demise from one of several terminal illnesses, he responds that the Saudi was given months to live all the way back in 1998. He describes bin Laden as suffering from low blood pressure and diabetes, both controllable diseases.
The 17th of about 50 children sired by a Yemeni porter who moved to Saudi Arabia and made good in the construction industry, bin Laden showed an early piety that deepened during his college years at King Abdul-Aziz University in Jeddah, where he encountered the man who would become his mentor, Abdullah Azzam. Bergen describes the charismatic Azzam, a Palestinian, as “the ideological godfather and global recruiter par excellence of Muslims drawn to the Afghan jihad.” Azzam worked tirelessly to rustle up men and money for the cause, frequently visiting Brooklyn’s infamous Alkhifa center—a major fundraising and recruiting center for the Afghan jihad—in search of both. If he truly was the godfather of the Afghan Arab phenomenon, then he’s also the godfather of many of the international terrorist groups plaguing the West today.
For bin Laden and the rest of the Afghan Arabs (a term used for foreign Islamists of all nationalities who came to fight the Soviets), the war was a galvanizing experience. Victory, in their minds, proved that Allah was on their side. “What we benefited from most, “was [that] the glory and myth of the superpower was destroyed not only in my mind, but also in all of Muslims.”
Bergen never loses sight of the way religion infuses his subject’s view of the world; bin Laden genuinely believed this stuff. If his religious fanaticism didn’t quite make bin Laden crazy, it often does made his motives and interpretation of events a bit opaque to the secular West. For example, when bin Laden’s agitation against his one-time friends, the royal family of Saudi Arabia, over the stationing of U.S. troops on the Arabian peninsula forced him to leave his homeland for Sudan, and then further pressure from both the Saudis and the Americans compelled the Sudanese to ask him to leave five years later, bin Laden didn’t see himself as becoming an increasingly unpopular outlaw.
Instead, his flight, according to Bergen, “recalled for him the Prophet Muhammad’s emigration, or hijra, from Mecca to Medina in Bin Laden, like most idealistic radicals, makes a practice of finding hope and encouragement in daunting situations.” Bergen, whose 1997 interview featured bin Laden’s unprecedented claim that “Arabs affiliated with his group were involved in killing American troops in Somalia in 1993,” says he finds the Saudi’s boast uncharacteristic and “surprising.” Bin Laden, after all, had “repeatedly dismissed efforts to link him to attacks on American soldiers in Saudi Arabia in 1995 and 1996 and has denied any direct role in the bombings of the U.S. embassies in Africa in 1998,” all actions in which his operatives played more decisive roles. What Bergen misses is that the fighting in Somalia actually worked. It led to the withdrawal of American troops from that nation—the kind of result that none of his other schemes have produced.
Holy War Inc. sheds light on what sort of people al-Qaida operatives tend to be. First, there’s their reverent devotion to a leader who, given the network’s decentralized structure, most know only through reputation. What a reputation! To the rich and desperately poor, bin Laden’s personal sacrifices to the cause were deeply moving—and genuine. Witness after witness tells Bergen they have seen him living in the most modest of circumstances. “His followers really, really believe in him,” a journalist who visited bin Laden in his cave said, recalling the leader’s crude dwelling built from branches of trees.
“They can see this millionaire, who sacrificed all those millions, and he is sitting with them in a cave, sharing their dinner, in a very, very humble way.” The unifying theme Bergen ostensibly hangs all this on is his concept of Holy War Inc., the idea bin Laden has fused a “retrograde reading of holy war” with “21st-century communications and weapons technology,” and then runs the whole thing like an international corporation.
Bergen finds much to remark upon in the fact that al-Qaida uses satellite phones and e-mail, and that bin Laden’s archaic-sounding proclamations are printed from an Apple computer. This seems not nearly as striking or significant as the way satellite channels such as Al-Jazeera have circumvented government control of the media in many Arab countries. As a Kashmiri militant explained to Bergen, “This technology is a good thing, but we reject the civilization of the West.” So far, that contradiction isn’t tripping up many Islamists.
That’s not what bothered Osama bin Laden. His major complaints against the United States were many. First, the U.S. military presence in Saudi Arabia had defiled Muslim land. “Our main problem is the U.S. government…By being loyal to the U.S. regime, the Saudi regime has committed an act against Islam, say bin Laden” (p. 19). The Koran forbids Muslims form making alliances with non-Muslims. Infidels on Muslim soil is seen as an invasion, the non-Muslim force is seen as an occupying force. It is then every good Muslim’s duty to overthrow the infidel regime. “If you don’t fight,” says bin Laden, “you will be punished by God” (p. 26).
Secondly, U.S. support for Israel is seen as a deliberate stance against the Islamic world. The hatred and bitterness between Jews and Arabs has been around since the time of Abraham. They are sworn enemies, and the U.S. alliance with Israel is seen as a threat. The Koran teaches that a true Muslim must go to war against all who reject Islam and must continue war until all are “utterly subdued.”
Bin Laden is seen as a “hero because he raised his voice against the outside powers that are trying to crush Muslims” (p. 31).
The bombing and economic sanctions against Iraq are seen as a direct assault on the Muslim world. Although bin Laden did not consider Saddam Hussein to be a true Muslim leader, he felt the actions taken by the United States were unprovoked attacks. This idea begins to sheds light on the contradictions found in the Islamic faith. The Koran teaches that enemies of Allah should be terrorized, and no distinction should be made between combatants and non-combatants. When the United States defended Kuwait against the aggression of a maniacal dictator, we were seen as infidels who attack without cause.
General U.S. support of certain Islamic countries such as Egypt, which Bin Laden considers a corrupted Islamic state didn’t deserve the support of anyone. He felt if they were true Muslim states, they would live up to the idea that all Muslims have a moral and religious duty to be at war with any power on earth that refuses to accept the Islamic vision of ideal life. The Koran also teaches that Muslims must never make friends with anyone who denies Islam as the truth or who has fought against Muslims.
These are the primary reasons for the declaration of war on America, and this is why bin Laden chose to attack things that symbolize government (the Pentagon) and American economic clout (the World Trade Center). Claiming the attacks were being waged against freedom are good propaganda to get Americans to rally in support of military action and to make us feel patriotic (We have to be against anyone who hates freedom, right?), but they have no basis in fact.
Osama bin Laden really was promoting and using a crusade war ethic to justify his actions. In a crusade, war is treated as an unconditional effort of good against evil. The object is to destroy evil and achieve ideal peace. This peace, al-Islam, means “the peace of submission or giving up.” Crusade treats war as a religious matter instead of a secular one. Bin Laden said, “We are confident…that Muslims will be victorious in the Arabian peninsula and that God’s religion, praise and glory be to Him, will prevail in this peninsula” (p. 19). This crusade is referred to as jihad. Jihad is war to extend the rule or Islam or to defend Muslim territory against incursion by non-Muslim powers. Bin Laden said, “We have declared jihad so God’s word is the one exalted to the heights and so that we drive the Americans away from all Muslim countries” (p. 19). Crusade is to be directed by God. Bin Laden really felt that God had directed him to wage war on America and that he would be rewarded for it. For the Muslim, jihad is the only way one can be assured of salvation. Bin Laden built sweeping support by the propaganda that by fighting the American infidels that salvation is assured.
The Koran teaches that anyone slain fighting “for the cause of Allah goes to heaven.” As Arabs, it’s important to remember that unlike most Afghan members of the Taliban forces, these men have been brainwashed to believe not just that martyrdom is glorious but that life without their cause has no meaning at all. Defection, for them, is not an option.
Even if bin Laden received everything he’s called for, which is Muslim rule over more or less the equivalent of the Ottoman Empire, it’s not clear he’d be satisfied with that. After all, he supports Islamist militants who demand an independent state in the Philippines, which is a far cry from the original land gained by Mohammad. It seems likely bin Laden inherited the belief that any nation with a Muslim population should be under Islamist rule. Those are imperial ambitions that are very menacing.
The crusade mindset never will be satisfied until the ideal is reached, which is unrealistic. That is what is so scary about bin Laden’s comments. He truly believed that the goals of Jihad were fully attainable. Crusade gives way to the idea of total war. The Koran teachings urge Muslims to slay all non-Muslims wherever they are found, sparing them only if they convert. This is quite and eye-opening teaching. Bin Laden said, “We have focused our declaration on striking at soldiers in country of the two Holy Places” (p.20). Theses attacks also have occurred on U.S. soil The interesting thing is that in order to be spared, an infidel must be given the opportunity to convert before he or she is killed. The people who fell victim to the terrorist attacks on 9-11 were given no such chance. This is another place where Islam contradicts itself.
Osama bin Laden turned the trade of terrorism into big business and hid it beneath the veil of religious zeal. He tried to promote his own agenda rather than achieve the unattainable ideal peace. The frightening thing is that he convinced many in the Muslim world to buy into his philosophy. Still, others say he is a radical and is taking the Koran out of context. Whether this is true would take a more in-depth study of the Koran itself., but from my observations and reading Bergen’s book, I feel bin Laden was redefining jihad. He was not trying to expand Islamic rule or defend any Islamic state from attack, but was out to make an example of any non-Muslim not aligned with Islamic teachings. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. The U.S. political and military leaders need to understand how this man’s thinking. Men such as him not fight as we do. He is on a mission for God, as he says. In order to do what we need to do, we must get a good grasp of the crusade war ethic.
