Monday, June 22, 2009 - 2:09 PM
Reuters' Inal Ersan reports on a shocking announcement from Al Qaeda:
If it were in a position to do so, Al Qaeda would use Pakistan's nuclear weapons in its fight against the United States, a top leader of the group said in remarks aired Sunday....
"God willing, the nuclear weapons will not fall into the hands of the Americans and the mujahideen would take them and use them against the Americans," Mustafa Abu al-Yazid, the leader of al Qaeda's in Afghanistan, said in an interview with Al Jazeera television.
Well, blow me down!! I had no idea that this would have been their intent! It's a good thing Al Qaeda clarified their policy on nuclear weapons, because there had been some ambiguity on the matter. I, for one, am also unclear about Al Qaeda's position on Israel, or whether they think Adam Lambert got jobbed in American Idol.
Seriously, there was one interesting wrinkle in the interview:
The militant leader said al Qaeda would be willing to accept a truce of about 10 years' duration with the United States if Washington agreed to withdraw its troops from Muslim countries and stopped backing Israel and the pro-Western governments of Muslim nations.
I'm not saying the United States should take Al Qaeda up on the bargain, but I do find it interesting that they occasionally float bargains like this out there.
I find it interesting that they're only calling for a truce (which I'm guessing was a translation from "Hudna"), in exchange for America completely conceding the area to whoever else decides to get involved (*cough* Chinese).
Yep, that's straight out of the Koran playbook.
What's the significance of 10 years?
It reminds me of the saying that peace is just another way of saying "give me time to rearm".
I think that hudna offer has been around for years.
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(4)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE