Opinion

Neo-Nazis v. Islamists

One natural reaction to Friday’s atrocity in Oslo will be to redirect much of our attention — and our limited anti-terrorism resources — away from Islamist militants to the “blonde on blonde” menace.

That would be a mistake.

True, the bombing and shooting attacks that killed at least 93 Norwegians, many of them children, show that racists of all stripes are capable of terrorism. Certainly Anders Breivik — the Muslim-hating, manifesto-writing, “Dexter”-watching, violent-computer-game playing, steroid-consuming, tall, blond Norwegian — fits the definition to a T.

But Timothy McVeigh, Baruch Goldstein and others had already taught us that.

Yes, while Breivik apparently acted alone, isolated networks of neo-Nazis and other extremists do exist across the West. Law enforcement should certainly watch them intently.

But, no, Breivik’s terrorism mustn’t cue an easing of our worldwide war against Islamic terrorism — because that foe won’t relent. Even after the recent killing of the enemy leader, bin Ladenism is alive and well, still wishes us harm and is most capable of inflicting it.

The FBI is reportedly alarmed about the rise of small groups of terror-plotting Americans — some overly enthusiastic converts to Islam, others frustrated descendants of immigrants from Muslim countries. Recent reports of more activity here by Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence, which employs many al Qaeda sympathizers, should raise even more alarms.

Islamist terrorism operates worldwide:

* Yemen: Al Qaeda in the Arabian Peninsula controls two major southern cities, Zinjibar and Jaar — and is advancing on the key port of Aden, which controls all ship movement in the Red Sea.

Yesterday, a car bomb exploded near an Aden army camp, killing at least nine soldiers. We have trained and armed that army, known as the Republican Guard, for years so it could fight AQAP — but the guard is now too busy preserving the interests of the ruling Salah family to help us against what the CIA calls the most dangerous terror group we currently face.

* Somalia: International organizations are struggling to get aid into the country, now suffering from drought-related famine. US officials struggle to juggle our heartfelt sympathies with concern that aid to Somalia would fall into the hands of al Shabab, the local al Qaeda affiliate that controls much of the country. Whatever solution we find to that true moral dilemma, al Shabab (whose leaders are denying the famine even exists) will likely use the disaster to broaden its sway. Meanwhile, Minnesota brings us almost daily reports of American teens of Somali descent who disappear, returning to the homeland to train for terror attacks here.

* North Africa: Previously pro-Western Mauritania is under attack from emboldened forces loyal to al Qaeda in the Maghreb. In the wake of Arab Spring revolutions, Islamist political parties are gaining power in several other countries in the region, with moderate Tunisia only the most notable. Deny it though they may, their rise may well advance the AQM cause.

* Afghanistan-Pakistan: Even after Osama’s demise, we’re far from winning the battle against his loyalists and other adherents to his cause. As Gen. David Petraeus said when he left his Afghanistan command post to become CIA chief, “I have no illusions about the challenges ahead.”

One illusion advanced since Friday is that Oslo means that we should now go back to combating Islamist terrorism exclusively with the law-enforcement means we use against right-wing terror.

But while it’s true that terrorism is terrorism regardless of the perpetrator, we must also consider why many in the media — including al Jazeera — immediately and wrongly concluded on Friday that Islamists were behind the Norway attacks.

The reason is that al Qaeda is alive and well. Yes, Breivik should alarm any who have underestimated the dangers posed by extremists of all stripes, and the extreme right-wing threat may be growing, but it isn’t nearly dangerous enough yet to justify war.

As for the much better organized, much more widely supported and still much more dangerous Islamist terrorism — the war, regardless of what we call it, must go on.

Twitter: @bennyavni