What Does Al Qaeda Really Threaten?

The English School of Thought Explains the Threat Posed By Al Qaeda:
- Written by A. J. Reibel, MIR 2008, New Zealand

The English School, which follows the ideologies of Grotius, maintains a middle-ground between the Realist and Utopian views of international relations. As a result, the English School supports both the notion that states are the key actors on the international stage, and that, despite power struggles, states “...are limited in their conflicts with one another by common rules and institutions.”[1] The emergence of Al Qaeda is, therefore, deeply troubling to the English School of thought. Barak Mendelsohn explains how Al Qaeda threatens the International System (IS) by directly challenging state sovereignty and by extension, the idea that states are the contestants in the international arena.

Al Qaeda espouses an extremist Islamic ideology that aims to topple the “...logic [of] the sovereignty-based state system...”[2] and replace it with an Islamic fundamentalist paradigm. The Islamic Khalifat that Al Qaeda seeks to establish throughout the Islamic world will, according to Bin Laden, break down “...the unnatural borders that separate the different Muslim states...” and create a unified Islamic super-state[3]. The creation of a Khalifat would dismantle the national workings of dozens of states and combine them into an amorphous Muslim nation, directed by Sharia Law.

The challenge that Al Qaeda’s ideology poses to state sovereignty stems from its rejection of the legitimacy of most Muslim states. Bin Laden not only condemns relations between Muslim and non-Muslim states, but also attacks the rampant corruption and un-Islamic behaviour of the leadership of many Arab administrations.[4] Saudi Arabia bears the brunt of his ire.

Furthermore, Bin Laden and Al Qaeda maintain that, both domestic and foreign policies of Muslim states frequently contradict what they consider “divine imperatives,” or Allah’s decrees.[5] Consequently, Al Qaeda dismisses the right of Arab governments to determine policy for their constituents. Further, Bin Laden argues that the search for international legitimacy, or international sovereignty[6], challenges Sharia Law’s legitimacy.[7]

In fact, Al Qaeda sees both Muslim and non-Muslim states as illegitimate. It dismisses international norms that form the basis for the UN, international law, and multilateral agreements, as being solely based on the laws of man, and, therefore, fundamentally wrong. In maintaining that “...only G-d is sovereign to create law,”[8] Al Qaeda’s ideology rejects domestic and international law. As Al Qaeda deprecates all man-made law, it also rejects the legitimacy of Arab and non-Arab state actors alike.

Although Al Qaeda aims to overthrow the IS paradigm, its trans-national challenge may actually result in strengthening the IS. While a “...confrontation between state logic and religious logic represents a possible erosion of the IS,”[9] the global threat of Islamic fundamentalism has fashioned a unique coalition of Western, Asian, and Arab nations in the face of a common, overwhelming threat.

Additionally, the creation of any Islamic super-state will, inevitably, fall within the Westphalian state model. A super-state, whether led by religious or nationalistic ideology, will have many of the same concerns that Western states seek to address – challenges to its sovereignty, a need to further its interests and secure resources in order to maintain its livelihood, and the unavoidable need to interact with other states. Iran serves as an example in which a revolutionary movement overthrew the sovereign government, and replaced it with an Islamic fundamentalist one – something that was seen as endangering the IS at large. Yet, as Iran has matured, it has acted within the framework of the IS.[10]

Barak Mendelsohn paints a “...comprehensive picture of Al Qaeda’s challenge, both to the sovereignty of specific states, and to the principles, rules, and institutions that bind states together in a society.”[11] Yet, despite the menace posed by fundamentalist Islamism, the IS will likely survive. After all, the nations of the world all stand to lose if Bin Laden succeeds.



[1] Hedley Bull, The Anarchical Society: A Study of Order in World Politics 2nd ed. (_: Macmillan, 1976), 25.
[2] Barak Mendelsohn, “International Society Meets Al Qaeda,” Review of International Studies, vol. 31 (2005): 54.
[3] Ibid., 60.
[4] Ibid., 58.
[5] Ibid., 62.
[6] Stephen D. Krasner, “Rethinking the sovereign State Model,” Review of International Studies, vol. 27 (2001): 21.
[7] (Mendelsohn 2005): 63.
[8] Ibid.
[9] Ibid., 56.
[10] Iran is a pariah, as it regularly violates International norms by supporting terrorist groups and seeking to develop WMDs. Nonetheless, it is important to look at Iran’s behaviour in International frameworks. It is an example that, even a religious fundamentalist ideology that secures power at a state level, matures and authenticates the IS.
[11] (Mendelsohn 2005), 46.