Voice of the Emirates – On November 14, a number of leaders and sheikhs who defected from al-Qaeda in Yemen issued a strongly worded statement. They accused the current leadership of “deviating from principles and politicizing the courts,” and called for an “independent court” to address cases of crimes, corruption, and internal disputes within the organization.
The statement was disseminated through encrypted channels on secure messaging apps like Telegram. Links were also posted on the dark web. The statement pointed to what it described as “recent deviations” in the organization’s policies. These included an unchecked expansion into alliances with other regional groups, as well as a focus on internal stability in Yemen and Syria. This, it claimed, came at the expense of “direct global jihad against the West,” “capitulation to international intelligence pressure,” and a reduction in external operations.
Regional security and terrorism researcher Ahmed Sultan told Voice of the Emirates that the disagreements within al-Qaeda in Yemen are not a recent development, noting their escalation in recent years. These disagreements have arisen between the global jihadist movement linked to al-Qaeda and the local jihadist movement. He added that the weakness of the organization’s central leadership has rendered coordination virtually nonexistent. He explained that the majority of fighters on the ground tend to focus more on the local Yemeni issue than on adhering to al-Qaeda’s global agenda, despite the general leadership’s continued adherence to its old line.
Sultan explained that “the current generation of fighters did not experience the Afghan battlefields or the globalized jihadist movement.” He emphasized that internal divisions persist, particularly with the continued defection of several leaders, most notably Abu Omar al-Nahdi, who is a prominent example of this phenomenon.
These divisions highlight the scale of the challenges facing al-Qaeda in Yemen, both in terms of its strategy and resource management. This could increase the likelihood of continued splits and weaken coordination between the organization’s local and global branches.
