Today's Post from the Hippolytic

Remember that video al Qaeda released just prior to the 2004 presidential elections, supposedly trying to influence their outcome? Who knows how it affected the election, although it seems it probably drove more people into the Bush camp who still saw the Republicans as the anti-terror party. I am convinced that's the outcome bin Laden sought: get Bush reelected, bleed the U.S. more in Iraq, turn as much of the Muslim world against the U.S. as possible, and eventually force an embarassing withdrawl from Iraq for which he could take credit. In that vein, here's another speculation: what if the upsurge in violence in Iraq over this past month is directly linked to the impending November elections? That is, what if the insurgents on the streets are trying to directly affect American voter opinion through heightened activity? This may not be as surprising as it sounds. As of yesterday, there had been 96 American soldier deaths in October, not to mention a large increase in sectarian death-squad activity and attacks on civilians, making this month the most violent month of 2006 and one of the worst of the whole war. It is significant that so much of the new violence has been directly focused on American soldiers, since it is American deaths that influence voter opinion much more than Iraqi deaths.

The problem, of course, with making such an assumption is that it locates the source of the increased violence in a coherent and coordinated movement. As we have seen, the insurgency is in Iraq is one of the most diverse and variegated resistance movements of modern history. But it is not impossible that primarily Islamist Sunni groups have coordinated activity against U.S. soldiers in the past few weeks to force a political outcome. And, since this is war, increased violence from one sector will inevitably encourage violence from others as well. Thus, the Shiite death-squads respond in vigour to increased Sunni attacks.

So let's assume for just a moment that the majority of U.S. military deaths in October are the result of a coordinated Sunni strategy to affect U.S. voter opinion (if anyone can find out more details about exactly who was killing soldiers, then leave a comment--the validity of my hypothesis ultimately rests on this information), then what was their strategy? What outcome are they trying to affect at the polls? While al-Qaeda, in my opinion, probably wanted Bush back in office in November 2004, I think the reverse is true now; that is, a pro-withdrawal Congress in power now is probably more to their liking. U.S. pullout from Iraq would be seen as a major Jihadi victory and the opportunity to finally realize Islamist goals in Iraq: foment sectarian violence into all-out civil war and eventually try to form a Sunni Islamist polity out of the ruins of violence. With that said, the Iraq War has proven a tremendous recruiting tool for al Qaeda, and it may be that they are not ready for it all to be over yet. And al Qaeda certainly wouldn't mind bringing the U.S. even more to its knees through continued violence. But if insurgent activity this month is in any way tied to the U.S. elections, then it seems like the insurgents could have only one goal in mind: dislodge the Republicans and get a pro-withdrawal majority into Congress. While in 2004 the increased threat of terrorist attacks would certainly get a Republican in power, violently demonstrating the failure of this Republican war will most likely help the Democrats.

Again, the veracity of this speculation rests on empirical facts to which I do not have access. But I wouldn't be surprised if Bush has finally gotten what he wanted and has brought the Islamists fully into the democratic political process (think of them as a lobbying group of sorts). Too bad it's ours and not their's.

By the way, I'm still voting Democrat. But you can imagine who my choice is...