Quartermasters of Terror
By
Patrick Radden Keefe
Blood from Stones:
The Secret Financial Network of Terror
by Douglas Farah
Broadway Books, 225 pp., $24.95
1.
On November 7, 2001, agents from Customs, Immigration, the IRS, and the FBI
burst into the Dorchester, Massachusetts, offices of al-Barakaat, a Somali
conglomerate with branches in forty countries, and arrested Mo- hamed M.
Hussein, treasurer of Barakaat North America, on charges of operating an
unlicensed money transfer business, or, as it was known, a hawala. Al-Barakaat
stood accused of raising, investing, laundering, and distributing money on
behalf of al-Qaeda. Thenâ~@~STreasury Secretary Paul O'Neill announced that its
various companies were "the money movers, the quartermasters of terror."
Meanwhile, federal authorities were also conducting raids on suspected
businesses in eight other American cities. It all had the appearance of a clean,
efficient police sting.
The raids were the work of Operation Green Quest, a task force established after
September 11, 2001, and designed to coordinate the efforts of various federal
offices and agencies with experience in tracking suspicious financial
transactions.[1] While the FBI's Financial Review Group was to concentrate on the
funding of the September 11 hijackings, Green Quest had the more ambitious
commission to "disrupt and dismantle" financial networks used by terrorists.
Just as Treasury investigators brought down Al Capone for tax evasion, the
thinking went, authorities might be able to follow a trail of dirty money from the
ruins of the Trade Center all the way to Osama bin Laden's caves in Afghanistan.
Three years later that initial optimism looks naive: the Bush administration's
efforts to comprehend, much less combat, terrorist financing have been an
abysmal failure. Certainly, we know now a great deal about the economics of
terrorism that we did not know then, but none of what we have learned is
reassuring. We know that acts of terrorism are extremely cost-effective.
According to the 9/11 Commission's final report, the attacks of September 11
cost less than half a million dollars; the 2000 bombing of the USS Cole is
estimated to have cost between $5,000 and $10,000. At the same time, the 9/
11 Commission learned that prior to September 11, al-Qaeda had an annual
budget of $30 million. The organization's budget is now estimated to break
down to roughly 90 percent for infrastructureâ~@~Tmaintaining training camps and
communicationsâ~@~Tand only 10 percent for financing actual terrorist attacks. This
is alarming news for those seeking to prevent further attacks, because small
amounts of money in transit are much harder to trace than large ones.
More alarming is what we haveâ~@~Tand haven'tâ~@~Tlearned about the sources o
terrorist funding. In the summer of 1996, the State Department concluded that
Osam bin Laden had a personal fortune of $300 million, and for many months
afte September 11, the image of a mad millionaire financing his own personal
war agains the West endured. But the findings of the 9/11 Commission point to
a graver reality al-Qaeda's annual budget is maintained not out of bin Laden's
deep pockets, but b piecemeal fund-raising, often through charities in the Gulf
countries, and particularl in Saudi Arabia, from supporters of violent jihad [2]
Yet that is where the trail runs cold. The 9/11 Commission was able to trace
money used by the hijackers, because the terrorists were brazen enough to
open American bank accounts and receive wire transfers from abroad. But the
commission could reconstruct the transactions that culminated in September 11
only as far back as the point at which the funds entered the orthodox financial
sector. As for the origins of the money before it entered the legitimate banking
system: "To date, the US government has not been able to determine the origin
of the money used for the 9/11 attacks." The commissioners went on to suggest
that the origins are "of little practical significance," because "al-Qaeda had many
avenues of funding." But the practical significance is enormous. Now that
various measures have been taken to crack down on legitimate transfers of
money for terrorist purposes, the murky networks of terrorist financing, and the
hawala remittance system in particular, present a formidable challenge to
American authorities.
The United States, which has traditionally been cast as the chief beneficiary of
the free flows of capital, goods, people, and ideas that characterized the
globalization and Internet revolutions of the 1990s, has now fallen victim to
precisely those developments. Osama bin Laden once told the Pakistani
newspaper Karachi Ummat that his men were as "aware of the cracks inside the
Western financial system as they are aware of the lines in their hands."[3] It
seems certain that his followers are more adept at understanding and
manipulating the quick migration of assets and finances in this new world than
the Western agencies pursuing them. In his recent book, Blood from Stones,
Douglas Farah conveys the complexity of terrorist financing and the failure of
government agencies to grasp that complexity. He describes a shadowy and
widespread world of quick and mutable currency flowsâ~@~Ta world which, even as
we catch a glimpse of it, seems to vanish before our eyes.
The hawala system provides a window into the mystery of illicit capital flows.
Hawala is a way of moving money without actually moving it. It is based on
informal but tightly knit networks of hawaladars, or brokers, in various regions
around the world. When a Pakistani taxi driver in Washington, D.C., wants to
send money home to his family in Peshawar, he approaches a local hawaladar,
and hands him cash or a check. The hawaladar contacts another hawaladar in
Peshawarâ~@~Twhether by phone or e-mail â~@~Twho forwards the sum, minus a small
commission, to the taxi driver's family. When the money has been transferred,
the American hawaladar owes his Pakistani counterpart the original amount, but
because of the number of transactions that are made, the debt tends to pass
back and forth numerous times between hawaladars. Outstanding accounts are
balanced weekly or monthly, and not always with money: debts are often settled
with goods, from Persian carpets to used cars.
In Arabic, the word hawala means "change" or "transform." But when the Hindi
language adopted the word, it acquired an additional meaning: "trust."[4] Trust
between hawaladars is the linchpin of the network: one dealer would not credit
another unless he was certain the debt would be honored. If a dealer fails to
honor a contract he is blacklisted, and this serves as a strong constraint. Trust
allows for the signature characteristic of hawala: it is virtually paperless.
Hawaladars do not require documentation from those who want to send money
or receive itâ~@~Tthe system is anonymous. Often the sender of money only needs
to inform the receiver of a code word or number which he is to give to the
dispensing hawaladar. The dealers do not keep extensive records of their
transactions, and are loath to show the authorities the few books they do keep.
Most hawala dealers do not announce their business by putting a sign on the
door. Hawalas tend to be side ventures, conducted in the back rooms of small
businesses in Asian and African communities throughout the world.[5]
Because of the intimate nature of hawala transactions, the origins of the system
remain obscure, and present scholars with a challenge similar to that of
researching an oral tradition. Hawala is said to predate the Western banking
system. It is believed to have emerged over a thousand years ago in South Asia
and the Middle East, and become popular with Arab traders who did not want to
carry large sums of money along the Silk Road. Most experts believe that
modern hawala networks took shape in the 1960s and 1970s as a way of
circumventing bans on gold imports in Southeast Asia and allowing diaspora
communities to send money to their families in Africa, the subcontinent, and the
Middle East. During the Vietnam War American GIs learned about hawala from
Indian merchants in Saigon and used the system to send money home.[6]
Hawala is an attractive system for a variety of reasons. It is much cheaper and
quicker than bank transfers or commercial companies like Western Union.
Commissions are minimal, exchange rates are favorable, and most transactions
are completed within a business day. Most importantly, perhaps, the system is
available to those who live in remote areas without accessible commercial
banking systems.
Today hawala is a vast global institution, serving millions of people worldwide.
Despite the fact that the system is illegal in India, Interpol estimated that in
1998, the amount of money circulating in India's hawala system totaled $680
billion, or roughly 40 percent of the country's GDP.[7] In Pakistan, where the
system is also technically illegal, hawala transfers far outnumber money
transfers through commercial banks. Worldwide, remittances from rich countries
to poorer ones amounted to more than $100 billion in 2003, and hawala is one
of the chief means of transporting that money. Moreover, it is not only ethnic
Africans and Asians who use the system. Since the usual facilities for
transferring payments hardly exist in Afghanistan, most international aid
organizations operating in the country use hawala, and an estimated $200
million in relief and development funds passed into the country through hawala
networks between 2001 and 2003.[8]
Most hawala transactions are, if not entirely legal, then at least legitimate: the
money being transferred is usually "clean," in the sense that the parties to the
transaction are not engaged in criminal activity. But the anonymity of the system
has also made it attractive to criminals. A 2000 Interpol report on hawala
provides a list of activities associated with the practice, from terrorism and drug
smuggling to tax evasion, gambling, and the transport of illegal aliens.
Observers differentiate between legitimate "white hawala" and criminal "black
hawala," but the one is often impossible to disentangle from the other.
According to the Interpol report, the illicit economy in South Asia is 30 to 50
percent the size of the orthodox economy.[9] Because the hawala system is
paperless, it would be difficult to separate the dirty transactions. In the words of
one Karachi hawaladar:
Maybe one out of every one thousand or two thousand transactions is [terrorist-
related]. Trying to find terrorist funds here is not like trying to find a needle in a
haystack. It is trying to find a needle in a needle stack.
Indeed, even apparently clean transactions can have an unsavory component. A
2003 World Bank report on hawala dealers in Kabul asks how it is that, in a
system where money does not actually move, impoverished Afghan hawaladars
can handle their end of the transactions:
How are the regional counterparts [of the hawaladars] able to finance payments
on behalf of the international aid institutions? What is the source of the afghani
equivalent paid out in the regions? In the last twelve months, for example,
international aid institutions have individually transferred amounts in excess of
US $10 million. Where is the afghani equivalent coming from?
The report goes on to speculate that transactions for international aid
institutions may be completed with "funds from illegal activities such as the
smuggling of gold or weapons, drug trafficking, or trafficking in girls and
women," that the aid organizations may be tangentially playing a part in
international terrorist financing, and as such, acting as de facto money
launderers themselves.[10]
According to the 9/11 Commission report, "al-Qaeda frequently moved the
money it raised by hawala." Because Afghanistan has no banking system and al-
Qaeda fears detection, it has made use of the system, the report tells us, since
1996. When Green Quest launched its sting on the Somali conglomerate al-
Barakaat, investigators told the press that company employees had transferred
funds from Boston to al-Barakaat's central money-exchange office in Dubai,
from whence those funds were funneled to al-Qaeda.
2.
The terrorists "understood how to take advantage of the rapid deregulation that
came with globalization, where international financial transfers are
instantaneous and hard to trace," Douglas Farah observes in the opening pages
of Blood from Stones, his short and provocative book on the financial networks
of terrorists. Farah was The Washington Post's West Africa bureau chief,
stationed in Abidjan, Ivory Coast, when, a few days after September 11, Cindor
Reeves, a member of Liberia's then-president Charles Taylor's inner circle, and
an important source for Farah, told him an intriguing story. CR, as he is known,
explained that in 1999 a group of Arab men struck a deal with Taylor and with
Ibrahim Bah, a Senegalese soldier of fortune who had become a commander
with Sierra Leone's Rebel United Front (RUF), to purchase large amounts of
diamonds from mines in territory controlled by the RUF. CR explained that these
Arab clients lived in a safe house near the diamond fields and occasionally
"asked him to join them in watching videos of Hezbollah suicide bombings." CR
claimed that the men were paying much more than the going rate for the
diamonds. The next time they met, Farah brought along a recent Newsweek
featuring mug shots of the "most wanted" al-Qaeda terrorists. Three of them,
CR said, had been among his Arab clients. Before publishing CR's claims, Farah
set out to corroborate the story, and shortly thereafter met with several RUF
commanders who confirmed that the transactions had taken place and
described the safe house in Monrovia. After reporting in the Post that al-Qaeda
had been buying diamonds from the RUF, Farah received word from the US
embassy in Abidjan that there was a credible threat against his life, and was
forced to flee Africa with his family.
It makes sense that al-Qaeda would have wanted to convert its assets into
diamonds before September 11. Since 1998 the Clinton administration had
cracked down on terrorist accounts, and in the summer of 1999 froze $240
million of Taliban and al-Qaeda money in Western banks. Converting assets into
gold, diamonds, and other precious stones was an ideal solution, because they
are easy to hide, transport, and convert back into currency. Thus, Farah tells us,
"al Qaeda operatives turned away from Western-style banks toward homegrown
money merchants in Saudi Arabia, Dubai, Karachi, and Lahore." Their chief
means of mov-ing money and stones was hawala. The rush to purchase
diamonds Farah interprets as "a desperate race against time to convert terrorist
cash into a commodity that could survive US retaliation."
In November 2001, back in Washington, Farah briefed the CIA on his findings an
was met with skepticism. "If this had been happening, we would have known
abou it," one analyst told him. Farah thinks the reason for their reaction was
that "they wer terrified of new intelligence failures being exposed." Even after
the BBC produced documentary showing RUF fighters describing their sales of
diamonds to buyers fro al-Qaeda, and the London-based watchdog group
Global Witness conducted a stud that corroborated Farah's findings, the agency
continued to deny, and tried to discredit his story [11] At a time when
damaging accounts of the incompetence of the Central Intelligence Agency have
become common, Farah's book presents an unusually scathing report of
irresponsible behavior bordering on malpractice. He recounts a visit by agents
to Cindor Reeves ostensibly to validate his story, in which CR was bullied, forced
to take a polygraph test, and dismissed as a liar, all in an effort to protect the
credibility of the CIA's witness, Ibrahim Bahâ~@~Tthe very man who had arranged
the al-Qaeda connection in the first place.
Despite strong evidence, officials in Washington continue to deny the existence
of a link between al-Qaeda and diamonds from regions of conflict such as Sierra
Leone. A 2003 report from Congress's General Accounting Office claims that
there is "a highly probable link" between African diamonds and international
terrorism, but that US law enforcement has been unable to substantiate it. The
9/11 Commission's final report comments: "We have seen no persuasive
evidence that al Qaeda funded itself by trading in African conflict diamonds."
The commission's skepticism is puzzling in light of Farah's work, but also in
light of a classified dossier provided to commission members by UN war crimes
investigators, which reported that numerous witnesses had seen various al-
Qaeda members negotiating diamond sales and that "al-Qaeda has been in West
Africa since September 1998 and maintained a continuous presence in the area
through 2002."[12]
The commission's Monograph on Terrorist Financing says that the
commissioners found "no reason to dispute" the claims of the FBI and CIA that
there is no link. But it also concedes that there is some evidence that specific al Qaeda operatives may have either
dabbled in trading precious stones at some point, or expressed an interest in
doing so, but that evidence cannot be extrapolated to conclude that al Qaeda
has funded itself in that manner.
This refusal to connect the dots remains a mystery, as does the commission's
failure to deal directly with Farah's allegations of such a link. Certainly, Farah's
case relies heavily on the testimony of Cindor Reeves, but he adduces
considerable corroborating evidence.
Whether you are persuaded by Farah's account or not, Blood from Stones
provides a convincing portrait of an extensive network of illicit capital flows that
is nearly impossible to monitor. Farah describes an extraordinarily wide range of
lucrative petty crime that terrorists have resorted to, from stealing and reselling
baby formula to illegally redeeming grocery coupons to selling knockoff T-
shirts. He recounts a Hezbollah operation in the late 1990s to purchase
cigarettes in North Carolina, where the sales tax was 5 cents, and resell them,
illegally, in Michigan, where the tax was 75 cents. Over four years, this scheme
netted $1.5 million.
The adaptability of terrorist assets is astonishing. Pakistani officials estimate
that between $2 million and $3 million in cash is hand-carried from Karachi to
Dubai each day. According to Farah, in one three-week period during the
American assault on Afghan- istan in 2001, funds leaving Karachi for Dubai
amounted to as much as $7 million a day. "Once in Dubai, much of the wealth of
the Taliban and al-Qaeda was converted to gold bullion and scattered around
the world," Farah maintains. Indeed, in late 2001, US Customs registered a
dramatic increase in gold imports by companies suspected of laundering money
for al-Qaeda. Thus dirty money smuggled into Dubai and converted into gold
was exported to America, where it could be sold for clean money, and so
complete the laundry cycle. In this way, even as the war on terrorism was
unfolding, American consumers may have unwittingly assisted bin Laden in
laundering his organization's assets.
In any account of global money laundering and terrorist finances, the city of
Dubai emerges as a vital nexus in which clean and dirty money liberally
intermingle. The United Arab Emirates (UAE) was one of only three countries,
along with Pakistan and Saudi Arabia, to recognize the Taliban government, and
during the late 1990s Dubai became the financial hub of the Taliban and of al-
Qaeda as well. The sheer flux of people and commodities in the city creates an
anonymous transit center for capital. Fewer than 20 percent of the UAE's
population are citizens, the rest are emigrants from all over South Asia and the
Middle East. Until very recently the country tolerated unregulated financial
dealings. Dubai's gold souk covers dozens of city blocks and is a major source
of the gold that is sent, legally and illegally, to India and Pakistan. According to
Farah, the Taliban and al-Qaeda prefer gold to normal currency, and it remains
"the official currency" of hawala networks.
Farah's book leaves the reader with the unsettling impression that everyone
from terrorists to rebel groups, from drug smugglers to arms dealers, from the
hawker selling fake Nike T-shirts to the convenience store owner offering
cigarettes at a discount are all elements in a vast, invisible web, a clandestine
economy every bit as intricate and efficient as our own.[13]
3.
Operation Green Quest did not live up to its initial promise. In July 2002, a
federal judge in Massachusetts sentenced Mohamed Hussein, who had been
apprehended in the offices of al-Barakaat, to eighteen months in prison.
Prosecutors asked for harsher penalties, but were able to substantiate only that
Hussein had transferred money without a license, and they could prove no link
with terrorism. The 9/11 Commission concluded that while al-Qaeda made
extensive use of hawala prior to September 11, the system was not used to fund
the World Trade Center attacks. After freezing more than $100 million in assets
during the first three months following the attacks, the Green Quest task force
seemed to lose its way. Bureaucratic competition and infighting between the
agencies created disorganization. Intelligence on terrorist financing did not
improve. Many of the various experts assigned to go after al-Qaeda's finances
were veterans of the war on drugs, and were more adept at chasing large sums
of money in offshore bank accounts than at learning the nuances of alternative
remittance systems. "If it wasn't Miami Vice money laundering, our bosses didn't
want to know about it," Patrick Jost, who was part of that effort immediately
following September 11, told Farah.
At a major conference on hawala convened by the United Arab Emirates and
held in Abu Dhabi in May 2002, the country's central bank announced that it
would start registering and certifying hawaladars. But many of the participants
believed that this would merely compound the difficulty by raising the costs of
the system. Greg Bretzing of the FBI said at the conference, "The worst thing is
to drive operators [further] underground and make it harder to track." This
assessment was endorsed by the 2003 World Bank study, in which hawaladars
who were interviewed argued against regulation, saying that money exchange
dealers have no incentive to reveal their activities, and that "even if it were
possible to identify, register, or license hawaladars, their transactions are so
varied and multifarious it would be impossible to develop a consistent set of
regulations" for them.
Moreover, when Green Quest announced plans to "disrupt" the financial
networks used by terrorists, Somali communities in the United States grew
understandably panicked because Somalia has no formal banking system and
depends on hawala for all of its international financial transactions. Freezing al-
Barakaat's assets hurt many small depositors in Somalia, and, because of al-
Barakaat's telecommunications interests, shut down the country's only Internet
service provider. Randolph Kent, the UN humanitarian representative in Somalia,
said that if the crackdown continued, "we have to start anticipating a crisis that
could be unique in the modern state systemâ~@~Tthe collapse of an entire national
economy."
One of the major functions of the hawala system in the Muslim world is to
facilitate Zakat, or charitable giving, one of the five pillars of Islam. In
combating the various institutions that supply terrorists with money, the West
runs the risk not only of debilitating the economies of countries like Somalia but
of appearing to wage a war on Islam itself. A 2002 report to the UN Security
Council cites "an institutional confusion between religion and finance" in Saudi
Arabia, and points out that the banking system in parts of the Middle East is not
regarded as strictly secular.[14] Michael Scheuer, a career CIA officer and the
author of Imperial Hubris, warns that "though US leaders say truthfully that
America neither wants nor is waging a war on Islam, we need to understand how
things look from where bin Laden works to align his own forces and incite
others." Scheuer contends that American efforts to limit, control, and track
charitable donations in the Muslim world have been perceived by Islamic leaders
as a substitution of man's law for god's law, and a "siege of welfare work."[15]
In the three years since the Barakaat raid, the question of the financing of
terroris has faded from public consciousness and political agendas. A
bipartisan task forc sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations
recommended $40 million to go to th Treasury Department to train foreign
governments in disrupting terrorist fi-nancing but in the fiscal year 2003, the
Bush administration allotted a mere $4 million for tha task. And on June 30,
2003, with rather less fanfare than had attended its formation Operation Green
Quest was quietly disbanded. In Farah's view this failure was no particularly
lamentable, because by the time Green Quest was organized, "most of al-
Qaeda's resources were already beyond reach." And currently, in the assessment
o former National Security Council official Rand Beers, the Bush administration'
efforts on tracking and combating terrorist finances are effectively "a rhetorica
policy.
In a presentation to the Senate on September 29, Lee Hamilton and Slade
Gordon of the 9/11 Commission conceded that "stopping the flow of funds to
al-Qaeda and affiliated terrorist groups has proved essentially impossible." It
seems clear, however, that any effort to thwart the quartermasters of terror
must begin with an effort to understand their tactics, and to that end, Douglas
Farah's important contribution should not be overlooked.