The truth about al Qaeda
Osama bin Laden gestures in an undated videotape broadcast by the Dubai-based MBC 17 April 2002. Bin Laden hailed the economic losses suffered by the United States as a result of the September 11 suicide attacks on Washington and New York. (Getty Images)
August 5th, 2011
01:16 PM ET

The truth about al Qaeda

Editor's Note: John Mueller is Professor of Political Science at Ohio State University. He is the author of Atomic Obsession and a co-author, with Mark Stewart, of the forthcoming book Terror, Security, and Money: Balancing the Risks, Benefits, and Costs of Homeland Security. He is also editor of the webbook Terrorism Since 9/11: The American Cases. The following is reprinted with the permission of the Council on Foreign Relations.

The chief lesson of 9/11 should have been that small bands of terrorists, using simple methods, can exploit loopholes in existing security systems. But instead, many preferred to engage in massive extrapolation: If 19 men could hijack four airplanes simultaneously, the thinking went, then surely al Qaeda would soon make an atomic bomb.

As a misguided Turkish proverb holds, "If your enemy be an ant, imagine him to be an elephant." The new information unearthed in Osama bin Laden's hideout in Abbottabad, Pakistan, suggests that the United States has been doing so for a full decade. Whatever al Qaeda's threatening rhetoric and occasional nuclear fantasies, its potential as a menace, particularly as an atomic one, has been much inflated.

The public has now endured a decade of dire warnings about the imminence of a terrorist atomic attack. In 2004, the former CIA spook Michael Scheuer proclaimed on television's 60 Minutes that it was "probably a near thing," and in 2007, the physicist Richard Garwin assessed the likelihood of a nuclear explosion in an American or a European city by terrorism or other means in the next ten years to be 87 percent. By 2008, Defense Secretary Robert Gates mused that what keeps every senior government leader awake at night is "the thought of a terrorist ending up with a weapon of mass destruction, especially nuclear." Few, it seems, found much solace in the fact that an al Qaeda computer seized in Afghanistan in 2001 indicated that the group's budget for research on weapons of mass destruction (almost all of it focused on primitive chemical weapons work) was some $2,000 to $4,000.

In the wake of the killing of Osama bin Laden, officials now have more al Qaeda computers, which reportedly contain a wealth of information about the workings of the organization in the intervening decade. A multi-agency task force has completed its assessment, and according to first reports, it has found that al Qaeda members have primarily been engaged in dodging drone strikes and complaining about how cash-strapped they are. Some reports suggest they've also been looking at quite a bit of pornography.

The full story is not out yet, but it seems breathtakingly unlikely that the miserable little group has had the time or inclination, let alone the money, to set up and staff a uranium-seizing operation, as well as a fancy, super-high-tech facility to fabricate a bomb. It is a process that requires trusting corrupted foreign collaborators and other criminals, obtaining and transporting highly guarded material, setting up a machine shop staffed with top scientists and technicians, and rolling the heavy, cumbersome, and untested finished product into position to be detonated by a skilled crew, all the while attracting no attention from outsiders.

The documents also reveal that after fleeing Afghanistan, bin Laden maintained what one member of the task force calls an "obsession" with attacking the United States again, even though 9/11 was in many ways a disaster for the group. It led to a worldwide loss of support, a major attack on it and on its Taliban hosts, and a decade of furious and dedicated harassment. And indeed, bin Laden did repeatedly and publicly threaten an attack on the United States. He assured Americans in 2002 that "the youth of Islam are preparing things that will fill your hearts with fear"; and in 2006, he declared that his group had been able "to breach your security measures" and that "operations are under preparation, and you will see them on your own ground once they are finished." Al Qaeda's animated spokesman, Adam Gadahn, proclaimed in 2004 that "the streets of America shall run red with blood" and that "the next wave of attacks may come at any moment."

Read: How Will Terrorism Evolve After Bin Laden?

The obsessive desire notwithstanding, such fulminations have clearly lacked substance. Although hundreds of millions of people enter the United States legally every year, and countless others illegally, no true al Qaeda cell has been found in the country since 9/11 and exceedingly few people have been uncovered who even have any sort of "link" to the organization.

The closest effort at an al Qaeda operation within the country was a decidedly nonnuclear one by an Afghan-American, Najibullah Zazi, in 2009. Outraged at the U.S.-led war on his home country, Zazi attempted to join the Taliban but was persuaded by al Qaeda operatives in Pakistan to set off some bombs in the United States instead. Under surveillance from the start, he was soon arrested, and, however "radicalized," he has been talking to investigators ever since, turning traitor to his former colleagues. Whatever training Zazi received was inadequate; he repeatedly and desperately sought further instruction from his overseas instructors by phone. At one point, he purchased bomb material with a stolen credit card, guaranteeing that the purchase would attract attention and that security video recordings would be scrutinized. Apparently, his handlers were so strapped that they could not even advance him a bit of cash to purchase some hydrogen peroxide for making a bomb. For al Qaeda, then, the operation was a failure in every way - except for the ego boost it got by inspiring the usual dire litany about the group's supposedly existential challenge to the United States, to the civilized world, to the modern state system.

Indeed, no Muslim extremist has succeeded in detonating even a simple bomb in the United States in the last ten years, and except for the attacks on the London Underground in 2005, neither has any in the United Kingdom. It seems wildly unlikely that al Qaeda is remotely ready to go nuclear.

Read: The Leaderless Jihad's Leader

Outside of war zones, the amount of killing carried out by al Qaeda and al Qaeda linkees, maybes, and wannabes throughout the entire world since 9/11 stands at perhaps a few hundred per year. That's a few hundred too many, of course, but it scarcely presents an existential, or elephantine, threat. And the likelihood that an American will be killed by a terrorist of any ilk stands at one in 3.5 million per year, even with 9/11 included.

That probability will remain unchanged unless terrorists are able to increase their capabilities massively - and obtaining nuclear weapons would allow them to do so. Although al Qaeda may have dreamed from time to time about getting such weapons, no other terrorist group has even gone so far as to indulge in such dreams, with the exception of the Japanese cult Aum Shinrikyo, which leased the mineral rights to an Australian sheep ranch that sat on uranium deposits, purchased some semi-relevant equipment, and tried to buy a finished bomb from the Russians.

That experience, however, cannot be very encouraging to the would-be atomic terrorist. Even though it was flush with funds and undistracted by drone attacks (or even by much surveillance), Aum Shinrikyo abandoned its atomic efforts in frustration very early on. It then moved to biological weapons, another complete failure that inspired its leader to suggest that fears expressed in the United States of a biological attack were actually a ruse to tempt terrorist groups to pursue the weapons. The group did finally manage to release some sarin gas in a Tokyo subway that killed 13 and led to the group's terminal shutdown, as well as to 16 years (and counting) of pronouncements that WMD terrorism is the wave of the future. No elephants there, either.

Post by:
Topics: Afghanistan • Security • Terrorism

soundoff (20 Responses)
  1. Dele.

    John, u have actually hit the nail right on the head. Bush made even much more noise about Saddam being a potential nuclear threat to the world which eventually turned out a big ruse. I insist, everthing about Osama and al-qaida is phantomed to discredit some people and gain cheap fame and sympathy.

    August 5, 2011 at 2:04 pm | Reply
    • j. von hettlingen

      Yes, I agree, Iraq was a terribly wrong guess!

      August 6, 2011 at 5:49 pm | Reply
    • Punkass

      It was not a guess. Saddam flooded the intellegence market with fake info on his nuclear program so that he wouldnt seem weak in front of Iran. Even his own officials were fooled. Saddam told them the day before the US entered Bagdad that he was bluffing the whole time and had been clandestanly moving all nuclear equipment to Syria. Remember all those SNL skits where Will Ferrell played saddam sitting in a bunker next a ton of warheads? We ALL believed it in the 90's yet somehow it was completely fabricated by Bush in 2003????

      August 8, 2011 at 1:03 pm | Reply
    • mclovin

      What a BS article. Al queda is a CIA database.

      August 8, 2011 at 8:47 pm | Reply
    • osama's ghost


      August 10, 2011 at 12:06 pm | Reply
  2. TowelHeadsAreMorons

    THAT's the truth.

    August 5, 2011 at 3:21 pm | Reply
    • j. von hettlingen

      Dele oversaw that Pakistan's nukes are real and the threat they could fall into the wrong hands.

      August 8, 2011 at 5:51 am | Reply
  3. Onesmallvoice

    The real truth about Al Qaeda is that they were never as powerful as the right-wing news media tries to make us think that they were. In fact, it's extremely dubious that without any kind of inside help, 9/11 could have been carried out. Even more probable, is that the true Ussama bin Laden has been dead for several years due to his nephritis and a look alike was murdered in his place on May 2 last.

    August 5, 2011 at 7:52 pm | Reply
    • Sanity

      Thank you, Onesmallvoice. You pretty much said it all.

      August 6, 2011 at 2:13 am | Reply
    • Punkass

      Ahahahah, the right wing media???? Soooo let me get this straight, Headline News, MSNBC, CBS, ABC and CNN are all a part of the right wing media?? Wow, good luck with that. Your understanding of the situation is a little biased.

      August 8, 2011 at 1:06 pm | Reply
  4. Arman Yousafzai in Mingora,Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (NWFP)

    This is just more and more propaganda to create a "boogeyman" to continue the war that has not made anyone safer and is just an extension of the great game.

    What the media will never tell you about the origin of Al Qaeda is that "Al-Qaida" was the name of a computer database of mujahideen fighters during the Soviet Afghan war.

    This was admitted in an article by former British foreign secretary, Robin Cook.

    He wrote: "Bin Laden was, though, a product of a monumental miscalculation by Western security agencies. Throughout the 80s he was armed by the CIA and funded by the Saudis to wage jihad against the Russian occupation of Afghanistan, Al-Qaida literally "the database", was originally the computer file of the thousands of mujahideen who were recruited and trained with help from the CIA to defeat the Russians."

    See his article in guardian, "the struggle against terrorism cannot be won by military means," he wrote this just a month before he died.

    August 6, 2011 at 3:01 am | Reply
    • Punkass

      Hasnt made anyone any safer? Really? Are you sure about that? Seems to me that US soil has only been attacked 2 in the past ten years and one of those was 9/11. The previous 10 years in America, at least 4 seperate attacks. So pre 9/11, 4 attacks – post 9/11, that I look at the numbers, you're right, we're not safer......moron.

      August 8, 2011 at 1:11 pm | Reply
    • Mike

      Actually I learned that Al Qaeda was a data base of contacts from the media, several years ago.

      August 11, 2011 at 7:00 pm | Reply
  5. Arman Yousafzai in Mingora,Swat, Khyber Pakhtunkhwa (NWFP)

    YOU YANKS ARE STUPID thinking you will win in the graveyard of empires by invading and occupying as you are creating more and more enemies everyday which will come back to haunt you, as it did to the predecessors.





    So what do you think of this plan?

    August 6, 2011 at 3:02 am | Reply
  6. Fluidly Unsure

    What I remember from 10 years ago is the reminder that low-tech is deadly too- you don't need lasers in orbit or nuclear bombs to be a threat. Later the worries were that something could be scrapped together with old USA and Russian weapons left behind. Rich folks in the region would probably help with the rest. At first we were hopeful that we would be praised by the victims of the oppressors (like east Germany and Poland), we soon learned the threat was deeper than we thought. To quit justifying inaction may have been reasonable then. Later our heads were clearer but we didn't get out of the mess- bad/bad mistake. BTW, you realize you pointed-out some reasons why some people consider our campaign in Afghanistan to be a success.

    I'm not commenting on the hidden WMD since we don't know what information the intelligence world had.

    August 6, 2011 at 11:23 am | Reply
  7. Truth is Treason

    We need a new investigation into 9/11.

    9/11: Explosive Evidence – Experts Speak Out, Trailer


    August 7, 2011 at 4:45 am | Reply
  8. Truth is Treason

    9/11 Truth Hollywood Speaks Out


    August 7, 2011 at 4:47 am | Reply
  9. Truth is Treason

    The Obama Deception is a hard-hitting film that completely destroys the myth that Barack Obama is working for the best interests of the American people.


    August 7, 2011 at 4:50 am | Reply
  10. Jesus is a solar messiah


    August 9, 2011 at 7:36 am | Reply
  11. this domain

    What's up to every single one, it's really a pleasant for
    me to pay a quick visit this web site, it contains priceless Information.

    October 10, 2014 at 9:09 pm | Reply

Post a comment


CNN welcomes a lively and courteous discussion as long as you follow the Rules of Conduct set forth in our Terms of Service. Comments are not pre-screened before they post. You agree that anything you post may be used, along with your name and profile picture, in accordance with our Privacy Policy and the license you have granted pursuant to our Terms of Service.