I was never really sure until this weekend whether Al Qaeda had it in for Americans or for the West. I have always suspected that Bin Laden is anti-Western (for want of a better word) rather than anti-American. It’s a distinction that has so far been lost on many Europeans, who have found it easier to compartmentalize what happened in New York as a kind of pay-back (deserved or not) for the perceived arrogance of the US as a superpower.

It was possible, I thought, that Osama Bin Laden was naive or insane enough not to know the difference between anti-Americanism and anti-Westernism. Or perhaps he is “just” anti-American, but showed a serious lack of judgment (in addition, if that’s possible, to the lack of judgment displayed by engaging in terrorism in the first place) in targeting New York, the world’s most international city. He managed to kill scores of nationalities, and the outrage in capitals around the world led to a wave of sympathy for the initial phase of the US’ response.

The question was, had this been intentional? Because there are two possible goals for Osama Bin Laden: engage the US, or engage the entire Western world. Either work towards building a cleavage between the US and its traditional allies over the differences in their approach to the Muslim world (including their stance vis-a-vis Israel), or look to pick a fight with everything that is not pure Muslim, in his eyes.

His rhetoric has always implied the former goal. And it is echoed even today. But Al Qaeda’s actions over the past week point to a grander ambition. By bombing a French oil tanker and by attacking tourists in Bali, the group is helping diminish what hesitance there may be on the part of the non-US West.

This will turn the tide of opinion in Europe towards a harder line against terrorism, and it will help harden the line against Iraq. This time, I am sure it’s what Al Qaeda wants.

[Mon, Oct 14 2002 – 08:19] Jezza Does Al Q have it in for the US or does it hate the west as a whole. Answer – I think it believes we’re all filthy capitalist pigs.

But I think the importance of Bali is not who — apart from being rich and western — it killed (if it was them), but where it killed them. It’s convenient to get the yanks worried about south east Asia when they are getting their army ready for somewhere else. It’s a kind of ‘how many armies have you got and how many places can you put them’ thing.

And then there’s the French oil tanker hit by Al Qaeda. Or was an empty tanker transporting tanks and guns from France to Yemen (for a good price of course) and hit by the CIA? Anything seems possible after a weekend in Amsterdam.

[Wed, Oct 16 2002 – 10:40] Rhian Sadly, I agree with Stefan. The anti-american “who do they think they are, they had it coming” line was very comfortable and easy to justify. But to bomb tourists, mainly from Australia, in Indonesia. It’s difficult to miss the point. Now all Westerners should feel the finger pointing at them and wonder why.

[Wed, Oct 16 2002 – 11:55] Rhian point of clarification: Terrorism is not justifiable under any circumstances. Resentment/bitterness is understandable. I think I need a weekend in Amsterdam.