Yemen blast: New phase in terror war?

Editor's note: In partnership with Stratfor, the global intelligence company, WorldNetDaily publishes daily updates on international affairs provided by the respected private research and analysis firm. Look for fresh updates each afternoon, Monday through Friday. In addition, WorldNetDaily invites you to consider STRATFOR membership, entitling you to a wealth of international intelligence reports usually available only to top executives, scholars, academic institutions and press agencies.

The apparent attack on a French-owned oil supertanker in Yemen will have significant ramifications for the U.S. war on terrorism, the potential U.S. war against Iraq, U.S.-European relations and European involvement in the anti-terrorism campaign, say analysts from Stratfor, the global intelligence company.

Unknown assailants apparently rammed a small boat packed with explosives into the tanker as it pulled into Ash Shihr port in eastern Yemen, approximately 350 miles east of Aden, on Oct. 6. The tanker – the Limburg – burst into flames and now reportedly is sinking into the Arabian Sea.

Captain Peter Raes, managing director of France Ship, told the BBC that a junior officer had seen a small craft approaching quickly and believed the two vessels touched prior to the explosion. The blast blew a hole in the side of the new, double-hulled ship, which was almost motionless in the water. Onboard fire or oil leaks have been ruled out as possible causes, and Raes said the type of crude oil that the Limburg was carrying was not particularly flammable.

After initially backing the claims of the Limburg crew, French and U.S. officials adopted the "wait-and-see" approach taken by the government of Yemen as to the cause of the explosion. However, Reuters – quoting an unnamed official source in Paris – reported that France had strong indications that the blast was the result of an attack.

The incident likely will send oil prices – already boosted by a war premium – soaring.

It remains unclear who the attackers were, or if any survived. The method of attack, the target chosen and the location – similar yet different in some ways to previous al-Qaida strikes – all point to local militants tied to al-Qaida rather than to a centrally planned al-Qaida operation. Yemen's eastern Hadramout region is the ancestral home of Osama bin Laden, and the area traditionally has been beyond the influence of the government in Sanaa.

The method of attack mirrors the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole in Aden, and the strike comes just days before the two-year anniversary of that incident. However, al-Qaida itself has never attacked on significant anniversaries, and the anniversary of the Cole bombing is of importance to few other than Yemen and the United States.

Finally, al-Qaida has largely refrained from attacking oil infrastructure. By decree, bin Laden has banned any assaults on oil, since it is the heritage of the Arab nations. Although the attack was technically against a European oil asset, the backlash will impact the entire Middle Eastern energy industry. If al-Qaida was directly involved, this would signal a change in the rules of engagement and could escalate the battle against the militant network.

No matter who is responsible, the incident will enrage the European business community and help to lock in European participation in the U.S. war on terrorism.

European commitment to that war has been complicated. Although European governments have shared intelligence with Washington – and French, German and British warships are patrolling the waters of the Arabian Sea in search of al-Qaida members fleeing Afghanistan – most states have been reluctant to jump onto the front lines. That will change, but it also could make the European argument against a U.S. attack on Iraq even more vehement while these governments try to keep the focus on the war against terrorism.

The French supertanker was likely a target of opportunity and not chosen specifically because it was French. It is possible that the name – which closely resembles that of American aviator Charles Lindburgh – made the attackers think it was a U.S. vessel. In any event, the attack against the French oil tanker will transform Europe's interest in fighting the anti-terrorism war. The Continent gets much of its oil from the Middle East – and with a European-wide economic slowdown, it cannot afford any threat to strategic energy supplies.

Another outcome may be a shift in support from Europe's powerful environmental groups. If environmental damage becomes a consequence of terrorist strikes, then environmental political parties such as Germany's Greens will be more likely to back their governments' efforts to break al-Qaida and its allies.

However, the most significant aspect of the latest attack is that U.S. intelligence missed it.

Despite the U.S. and allied military presence throughout the region – and intelligence sharing by many Middle Eastern governments, particularly that in Yemen – Washington did not anticipate the supertanker attack. Indeed, U.S. President George W. Bush scaled back the terrorism assessment alert status in late September from "high" to "elevated," saying the al-Qaida network had been disrupted.

The implication is clear: The United States is flying blind in the Middle East.

It will be months or years – if ever – before it becomes clear just who was behind the Oct. 6 assault. As the days and weeks pass, however, the fallout will reverberate throughout the globe. It will be especially significant for Europe and its relationship with the United States in their joint battle against terrorism.

Get a discounted annual STRATFOR membership.