Just happened to see this rather fascinating Reuters article, concerning a probable alliance between South American cocaine producers and an organization that calls itself ‘Al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb’. Like something out of a paperback thriller (and possibly exaggerated just a tad in the article), this organization apparently has acquired a fleet of long-range aircraft, including Gulfstream exec jets and Boeing 727s, and is using them to ferry tons of drugs from Colombia and Venezuela to various West African countries, where existing overland supply routes are then used to deliver the cargo to European markets. The operation takes advantage of a lack of radar coverage in most of the region, as well as the fact that there are plenty of poorly monitored airports en route, and lots of officials willing to look the other way, for a small consideration, to facilitate things. Apparently as well, something, whether more drugs, people, weapons or all three, is being flown back the other direction, although the article seems to veer into pure speculation on that point.
Points for debate: aside from the obvious concerns about a terrorist organization that made its name flying aircraft into buildings having free access to large passenger jets, what are the ramifications? Should the US consider diverting a carrier group and AEW aircraft to the south Atlantic to interdict these flights, with all the cost that would be involved? Is the reporting on this some sort of black ops campaign intended to make a case for ousting Chavez, since much is said about these flights using Venezuelan airfields in transit? I’m not really sure what to think about all this. I’m listening.
This is actually almost the plot of Tom Clancy’s The Teeth of the Tiger.
I have a feeling if the US is concerned about these flights they’ll just stop happening one at a time. The planes will take off and never make it to their destinations. And no one will know why. And no one will ask.
I didn’t know al-Queda had a funding problem. I didn’t know there was actual evidence of that organisations involved in drug trafficing - although there clearly is of Taliban involvment.
Of course, it suits USA agencies to continue to ‘link’ al-Queda with everything from global warming to deforestation, though it doesn’t make it any truer than Saddam’s ‘links’ to 9/11.
More likely, historically speaking of course, is USA government involvment in the cocaine business.
Nonetheless, I’m very grateful for the contribution of the “unnamed source”.
Well, al-Queda seems to be more of a brand name loosely linking like-minded groups than a structured organization, and it’s not clear from the article that aQiM has anything much to do with bin Laden’s group. Indeed, the article quotes one official that says he believes they are not a group of religious fundamentalists (hell no, sounds like they’re drug traffickers) but using the term as an ideological catchall.
Anyway, on re-reading what sticks out is what seems very much like an attempt to link Venzuela’s Chavez to al-Queda (or a-Q in the Maghreb, that is). Maybe that’s what this little thriller is really all about.
Could work well for us. FARC went from being a people’s Communist work revolution with some support from various quarters to nothing more than a drug gang once they got a taste of the cash.
Maybe Al-Q could turn into just a bunch smugglers and mafia types if the low levels start getting their hands on the money that drugs brings.
Welcome aboard Air al-Qaeda. In the unlikely event of a water landing, please slip on the vest found underneath your seat. To inflate, pull the cord like… BOOOOOM!
I don’t think the author was claiming they are, just that they were two types in the fleet. Early on, an unidentified turboprop type is mentioned as well.
Why would that be a good thing? I should think it would make them even harder to get rid of, and the drugs would probably do a lot more long-term damage to America than occasional destruction of aircraft and/or buildings.
It might corrupt them out their jihadist ideology, but it would not make them less pernicious.
No mention, iirc, of terrorist connections, but this episode of Unreported World (a UK Channel 4 programme) covered the subject of routing drug shipments via West Africa a couple of years ago. There’s a useful text summary, but if the ‘watch again’ function works where you are, it’s a fascinating (if worrying) half hour.
I would think the big-name cocaine guys would be concerned about a) the amount of heat having terrorist attacks linked to them would bring and b) losing valuable cargo, planes and pilots in a suicide bombing via jet.
Al Qaeda as I understand it was a designation used by the CIA to describe the Afghan Mujahideen. “The Base”, meaning the base of support for the overthrow of the Communist regime in Afghanistan. It is a loose rallying cry.
Part of the problem here is treating terrorist as its own entity. Terrorists are merely another flavor of ‘pirate’ just like drug smugglers and Somali kidnapping organizations. The only real solution to the problem described above, regardless of whoever actually flies the planes is that the lack of radar cover is a serious issue.
Hezbollah, which actually IS a real organization, think of it as the Lebanese Mafia, has a huge presence in the uncontrolled portion of Paraguay where there isn’t sufficient radar cover, and there is already a major city that has become a sort of hub of all sorts of criminal activity. It’s called Ciudad de Este. They have everything from Chinese software pirates, to drug smugglers, to a Hezbollah expat community. It’s a bazaar of criminal activity. South America and Africa are both without serious infrastructure such as radar cover.
People waking up dead and jets being shot down won’t make a bit of difference, no more than the handful of arrests we make in the cross-border traffic from Mexico. It simply doesn’t matter. If the profit motive is there, and there is a chance that the risk will pay off, people will do it. Even if we killed a lot of people we still would be unlikely to intercept more than 20% of the traffickers.
I think the Christmas bomber was allowed to bypass security. Unfortunately for whom ever wanted him to succeed his plan was thwarted by another passenger and a faulty fuse. I find it interesting where he took off from originally. Didn’t we just meet there for a summit or something after Christmas?
This would have been another 9-11 type story the media loves. Plane down with hundreds of dead on Christmas Eve. Who owns the media? It would also give our country a boost to keep the war going against the dreaded “enemy”. Take our focus off of the economy and how broke our country is along with trying to get that Obama Care pushed on through while we are too busy to notice…
Who owns Google? Why are they threatening to pull out of China? Could it be the pressure China is putting on us to pay back our huge loan to them?
Sometimes I think a conspiracy theory or two is good for us. It keeps us looking for the real one which is sometimes right in front of our eyes.